Legal Opinion
Kreichman v. Webster, Admr.
Supreme Court of Vermont
Decided November 1, 1938PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSherburne, J.
This is an action upon a contingent claim under P. L. 2944. The first count is in the common counts with a specification. The second count is special. The case comes here before final judgment upon defendant’s exceptions to the overruling of his motion to dismiss each count of the declaration upon the ground that the county court has no jurisdiction and that exclusive jurisdiction is in the probate court.
Our statutory provisions about contingent claims are contained in chapter 128, secs. 2940-2950, of the Public Laws. "We quote below from certain of these sections so far as material here:
“Sec.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Administrator of Sargent's Estate v. Administrator of Kimball's EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864
- Smith v. White EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1937
- In Re Fisher's EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1931
- Abraham, Exr. v. Jones, Admr.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1935
- Atherton v. FullamSupreme Court of Vermont · 1883
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. TherrienSupreme Court of Vermont · 1993
- In Re Estate of CartmellSupreme Court of Vermont · 1958
- Abbott v. AbbottSupreme Court of Vermont · 1942
- In Re Estate of EverettSupreme Court of Vermont · 1943
- Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. HobbsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1944
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.