Nathan v. Lehman, Abraham & Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Jefferson Circuit Court in Chancery. Hon. X. J. Pindall, Circuit Judge. 1. Probate judgments are conclusive, unless for fraud in obtaining them, and until appeal taken. 5 Ark., 305; ib., 705; n ib., 95; U ib., 8U; k Otto, Iff6. 2. The fourth judgment was upon an obligation contracted by the administrator, as a part of the necessary expenses of administration, and a valid claim against the estate.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Jefferson Circuit Court in Chancery. Hon. X. J. Pindall, Circuit Judge. 1. Probate judgments are conclusive, unless for fraud in obtaining them, and until appeal taken. 5 Ark., 305; ib., 705; n ib., 95; U ib., 8U; k Otto, Iff6. 2. The fourth judgment was upon an obligation contracted by the administrator, as a part of the necessary expenses of administration, and a valid claim against the estate. (Turner v. Tapscott, 30 Ark., 318.) But if improperly allowed, it was a mere error, which could only be corrected by appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtEnglish, C. J.
The bill in this case was filed in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, by Hanche Nathan against Henry Nathan, as administrator of the estate of Henry Lyons, deceased, and Lehman, Abraham & Co., creditors of the estate. The substance of the bill was that complainant was the sister and only heir of Henry Lyons, .deceased, and entitled to his estate after payment of his debts. That he left a valuable lot and storehouse in Pine Bluff, the rents of which were sufficient to pay his just debts; that Lehman, Abraham & Co. had fraudulently obtained excessive and illegal allowances in the Probate…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Securities Inv. Co. of St. Louis v. DonnelleyNevada Supreme Court · 1973
- Perez v. Gil's EstateNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1924
- Steele v. KelleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912