Ayers v. Donnell
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. I. The special statute of limitations contained in the administration law controls in this case. (Montelius vs. Sarpy, 11 Mo., 242; Wagn. Stat., 920, § 26.) II. As no notice of grant of letters testamentary was given, the administration bar in the special statute of limitations does not run.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. I. The special statute of limitations contained in the administration law controls in this case. (Montelius vs. Sarpy, 11 Mo., 242; Wagn. Stat., 920, § 26.) II. As no notice of grant of letters testamentary was given, the administration bar in the special statute of limitations does not run. (See authorities cited above, also Wiggins vs. Lawson’s Admr., 9 Mo., 262; Hawkins vs. Eedmoncl, 13 Mo., 125; Bryan vs. Mnndy, 17 Mo., 556; Clark vs. Collins, 31 Mo., 260.) III. The court erred in not permitting plaintiff to introduce evidence tending to prove a state…
1Opinion of the CourtWagNER, Judge
This proceeding was originally instituted in the Probate Court, where the judgment was for the defendant, an appeal was then taken to the Circuit Court, where a new trial was had with a like result.
The record shows that in 1839 and 1840, Geo. W. Hix contracted debts and became indebted to Patrick Hix in the State of Virginia; that about that time he absconded from Virginia and went to Texas, and, as is alleged, concealed himself, so that process could not be served upon him. He subsequently came to this State, but at what time is not shown, and died, leaving a last will and testament. In…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Polk's Administrator v. AllenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1854
- Headlee v. CloudSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- M'Nair v. LaneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1828
3Cited by3 opinions
- Little v. ReidMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
- Doerge v. HeimenzMissouri Court of Appeals · 1876
- State ex rel. Bain v. BrowningMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903