Hartwell v. Jackson
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Liberty. I. The proceedings show that the Probate Court had once decided upon the validity of the marriage of said Martha with said E. H. R. Wallis; and the subsequent action and decision of said court upon that subject-matter was void. (Merle v. Andrews, 4 Tex. R.; Bank of the U. S. v. Mass., 6 How. U. S. R., 31.) II.
Read the full summary
Error from Liberty. I. The proceedings show that the Probate Court had once decided upon the validity of the marriage of said Martha with said E. H. R. Wallis; and the subsequent action and decision of said court upon that subject-matter was void. (Merle v. Andrews, 4 Tex. R.; Bank of the U. S. v. Mass., 6 How. U. S. R., 31.) II. There is no statement of facts, but the proceedings show clearly that said Martha and E. H. R. Wallis were married, and that the infants, Francis M. and Hansel R., were the issue of said Union. This being the case, even if it be true that, under the circumstances,…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill. Ch. J.
This record presents a tangled maze of anomalous proceedings, in the narrative of which no regard is had to their chronological order, and a litigation between several, dwindles towards its close (at least in. the style of the case) to a contest between two, who may be regarded perhaps-as champions of the respective adverse interests. I shall not attempt a statement of the case, but will notice only such facts as are necessary to explain the grounds of the decision. The controversy relates to the estate of E. II. R. Wallis, who departed this life in 1S46, leaving a widow,…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Watts v. OwensWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
- Anna & Graham v. StuveTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- T. W. House & Co. v. CollinsTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- Boudreaux v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1962
- Santill v. RossettiAshtabula County Court of Common Pleas · 1961
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.