Williamson v. Anthony
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to First, District Court. I. The plaintiff in error, Williamson, was sole administrator of Cooksey’s estate, and he complied strictly with the statute in prosecuting his demand to the Probate Court. He presented it to the court at the December Term, 1864, within one year after the grant of his letters, as is shown by the records.
Read the full summary
Error to First, District Court. I. The plaintiff in error, Williamson, was sole administrator of Cooksey’s estate, and he complied strictly with the statute in prosecuting his demand to the Probate Court. He presented it to the court at the December Term, 1864, within one year after the grant of his letters, as is shown by the records. And although the court may have omitted to appoint a competent person on the presentation of the demand to protect the interest of said estate, as is directed by the statute, still the appellant did his duty and the court did not. (See Wagn. Stat., art. iv, p.…
1Opinion of the CourtBliss, Judge
The plaintiff was administrator of the estate of W. P. Cooksey, and in 1865, one year after taking out letters, presented to the probate judge a claim against the estate for some $1500, founded upon a note of decedent. Without appointing a “suitable person to appear and manage the defense,” the probate judge passed upon it, in all other respects, regularly, and assigned it to the fifth class. Some four years afterward, the error in the former allowance being discovered, the matter was again brought before the court, when defendant was appointed to defend; the statute limiting the presentation…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Wernse v. McPikeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- Spaulding v. SussMissouri Court of Appeals · 1877
- North v. Walker's AdministratorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Hicks v. JamisonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881
- Wernse v. McPikeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.