Legal Opinion

Longino v. Bearden

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided July 13, 1933No. 9398PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBuck, P. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.)

The court did not err in overruling the general demurrer *360filed by Longino.. It does not appear that the will of Mrs. Martha A. Bearden has been probated in solemn form; or, if it was probated in solemn form, it does not appear that those who would have taken under the will of W. F. Bearden had such notice or were made parties,- so as to set up the alleged fact, now insisted on in this petition, that Mrs. Martha- A. Bearden did not have testamentary capacity to make a will disposing of the property belonging to the estate of her husband, W. F. Bearden. If as…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Robertson v. CoxSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937
  2. Bearden v. LonginoSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937
  3. Burgin Lumber Co. v. KirkseySupreme Court of Georgia · 1948
  4. Carithers v. FlaniganSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
  5. Cheatham v. GormleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API