Hardy v. Gholson
Mississippi Supreme Court
On appeal from the probate court of Monroe county; Hon. W. A. Tucker, probate judge. The opinion of the court contains a statement of the facts of the case. The demurrer should have been sustained, as the plea presented no issue, or one of law only; and that was, whether the recital in the order of the probate court was conclusive or not.
Read the full summary
On appeal from the probate court of Monroe county; Hon. W. A. Tucker, probate judge. The opinion of the court contains a statement of the facts of the case. The demurrer should have been sustained, as the plea presented no issue, or one of law only; and that was, whether the recital in the order of the probate court was conclusive or not. By the demurrer, the question was raised as to its conclusiveness ; and it was determined by the court, that you could not go behind the order of court. The following case is considered decisive of this: Neal v. Willons, 12 S. & M. 650. But if the demurrer…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Handy
This case is brought up by appeal from the probate court of Monroe county.
In February, 1851, the appellants filed their petition in the probate court, as distributees of Albert G. Greenwood, against the appellee, alleging that the appellee, as administrator of Greenwood, at the April term of that court, 1842, had rendered his final account and been discharged; that the order allowing the account and discharging the administrator is void, for want of such notice as the law required ; that the account contained large credits, which were improper and unjust, &c., and praying that the account and…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Hunt's Heirs v. Ellison's HeirsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
- Amy v. AmyUtah Supreme Court · 1895
- Pollock v. BuieMississippi Supreme Court · 1870
- Viator v. StoneMississippi Supreme Court · 1947
- Tarleton v. CoxMississippi Supreme Court · 1871