Wall v. Wall
Mississippi Supreme Court
Oh appeal from the probate court of Amite county; Horn James F. Lowry, judge of the probate court of Amite county. The opinion of the court contains a sufficient statement of the facts of the case. The probate court was of competent jurisdiction to decide whether the paper was or was not testamentary. It decided that it was, and constituted “part and parcel of the will.” If there was error, that decision should have been appealed from..
Read the full summary
Oh appeal from the probate court of Amite county; Horn James F. Lowry, judge of the probate court of Amite county. The opinion of the court contains a sufficient statement of the facts of the case. The probate court was of competent jurisdiction to decide whether the paper was or was not testamentary. It decided that it was, and constituted “part and parcel of the will.” If there was error, that decision should have been appealed from.. It is conclusive, till reversed, on that court and all courts. Mor-rell v. Dickey, 1 Johns. Ch. R. 153; Bush v. Sheldon, 1 Day, 170; Wills v. Spraggins, 3…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Handy
This was a petition filed in the probate court of Amite county, by the appellee, the widow, and a distributee of the estate of Jehu "Wall, deceased, against the appellant, executor of Jehu Wall, alleging that the testator, by an instrument of writing exhibited, and which had been decreed by that court to be a part and parcel of the last will and testament of the testator, and probated and admitted to record as such, made bequests of certain slaves, which the executor had failed to return in his inventory of the estate; and the petitioner being entitled to one half of these slaves, as her…
2Cited by5 opinions
- People v. DawellMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Cason v. CasonMississippi Supreme Court · 1856
- Root v. McFerrinMississippi Supreme Court · 1859
- McLeod v. HarperMississippi Supreme Court · 1870
- Willis v. LoebMississippi Supreme Court · 1881