Legal Opinion
Bearden v. Baldwin
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided December 22, 1931No. 8359PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRussell, C. J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) The application of C. H. Baldwin to be appointed administrator de bonis non cum testamento annexo is based upon the request of parties *195alleged to be interested in the estate of the deceased Barton Thrasher, and is made in his capacity as clerk of the superior court of Morgan County. The caveats are based upon the ground that there is no estate of Barton Thrasher to be administered.
There were two caveats to C. H. Baldwin’s application to be appointed administrator. In the caveat filed by Bearden as executor of the will of Josephine Y. Overby (formerly…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mathews v. RountreeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Towner v. GriffinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Augusta & Summerville Railroad v. PeacockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1876
- Dierks v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Maloy v. MaloySupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
3Cited by8 opinions
- Sybilla v. ConnallyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1942
- Estate of Alberta Norton v. HindsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1987
- Paulk v. City of OcillaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
- Berry v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1952
- Crow v. WhitfieldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.