Cilley v. Patten
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Hampshire
This was a suit by Horatio G. Cilley against William A. Patten, in which John J. Cilley and J. Henry Dearborn were also joined as defendants, to disestablish a will admitted to probate in the state court and establish an earlier will. For reports of • previous decisions in the same litigation, see 46 Fed. 892; 1 O. C. A. 522, 50 Fed. 337; 58 Fed. 977; also, 62 Fed. 497.
1Opinion of the Court
ALDRICH, District Judge.
This is a bill in equity, and involves the validity of the will of Matilda P. Jenness, dated March 26, 1884, in which William A. Patten is sole legatee, or, to speak more speci-ficially, seeks the disestablishment of the will of 1884, admitted to probate in the state court, and the establishment of a will dated in 1878, not probated in the state court, and in which Horatio G. Cilley, John J. Cilley, and J. Henry Dearborn are sola legatees. It also prays for relief in the circuit court of the United States annulling the decrees of the probate courts in New Hampshire, an…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Mansfield, Coldwater & Lake Michigan Railway Co. v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Williams v. NottawaSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Detroit v. DeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- In re CilleyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Hampshire · 1893
- Cashman v. Amador & Sacramento Canal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1886
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Indianapolis v. Chase Nat. BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- City of Indianapolis v. Chase National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Gage v. Riverside Trust Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1906
- Ames Realty Co. v. Big Indian Mining Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Montana · 1906
- Thompson v. NicholsDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1919
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.