Legal Opinion

Seeds v. Seeds

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1927No. 19941PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, C. J.

In this case we are not troubled by disputed issues of fact. The demurrer to the petition admits its well-pleaded allegations. The alleged will of Estella Seeds must therefore be, for the purposes of the discussion, admitted to be a forgery and a nullity, unless validity and potency have been given to it by its fraudulent probate and the other probate proceedings of equally fraudulent nature whereby the legal title to the property was lodged in James W. Seeds, the party who conceived and executed the fraud. The difficulties of the case are greatly reduced by the fact that the property has not…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Case of Broderick's WillSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
  2. Gaines Et Ux. v. ChewSupreme Court of the United States · 1844
  3. Patterson v. DickinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1912
  4. McEntire v. McEntireOhio Supreme Court · 1923

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Peterson v. TeodosioOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  2. DeWitt v. DuceSupreme Court of Florida · 1981
  3. Antonopoulos v. EisnerOhio Court of Appeals · 1972
  4. Johnson v. StevensonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  5. Barone v. BaroneWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1982

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API