State Ex Rel. Clary v. Probate Court

A preliminary question is presented by respondents’ motion to strike the second and third sentences from the relator’s reply for the reason that they are conclusions of law.

The motion is granted. Counsel are agreed that the third sentence should be stricken since it contains the mere conclusion that the proceedings in the Probate Court of Preble county were null and void. The second sentence is likewise unimportant inasmuch as it simply states the reason why no notice was given concerning the application to probate the earlier will in Hamilton county.

The decisive question is whether the…