Collins v. Elliott
General Court of Virginia
EJECTMENT for a tract of land called Tally’s Addition Corrected, also Tnlly’s Addition and Eoe’s Lane. The plaintiff’s lessors claimed title as devisees under the will of Samuel Eoe, deceased, dated the 5th of May 1776. An objection was made in the orphans court in April 1777, to the probat of this will.
Read the full summary
EJECTMENT for a tract of land called Tally’s Addition Corrected, also Tnlly’s Addition and Eoe’s Lane. The plaintiff’s lessors claimed title as devisees under the will of Samuel Eoe, deceased, dated the 5th of May 1776. An objection was made in the orphans court in April 1777, to the probat of this will. The witnesses to the will were dead. 1. The question before this court was, Whether it was the will of Samuel Eoe? Several witnesses were examined in court, and the depositions of other witnesses read in evidence to the jury, to prove the will. An objection ivas made to the deposition of…
1Opinion of the Court
Chase, Ch. S. —
The court are of opinion that such declarations as those offered to be given in cvid'ence cannot be received to establish the will, The chief judge said that one witness would besuf-ficient to prove all the circumstances or requisites made essential by the statute of frauds; but where all the witnesses were dead, proof of the hand writing of the testator, and of all the witnesses, was necessary. The plaintiff excepted.
Verdict and judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeals, and at December term 1808, the judgment of the General Court was affirmed.
S…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hoppe v. ByersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1883
- In re Estate of Godsil, Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco1895
- Randall v. HodgesHigh Court of Chancery of Maryland · 1832