Cheever v. Circuit Judge

7 N.W. 186, 45 Mich. 6
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided November 10, 1880·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Cooley, J.

The sole question in this case is, whether the persons named executors in an instrument purporting to be the last will and testament of Hiram Arnold, deceased, may ■appeal from the order of the probate court disallowing the same, notwithstanding all persons who would be interested as heirs or distributees in case the decedent had died intestate, and all living persons whom the instrument purports to make beneficiaries, unite in a settlement of the estate .and oppose the •appeal. The circuit court held that they could not, and dismissed the appeal which, in due form, they had attempted to take.

The circuit judge was quite right in saying that litigation •over estates is a great and growing evil, and that parties should be encouraged to avoid it by voluntary arrangements, instead of being prevented. But it becomes important in any case to make sure that all persons who are or may be interested join in the settlement, and also, in the case of wills, that no declared policy of the testator in putting his property or any portion of it beyond the control of those concerned in ■the settlement, is defeated thereby.

A reference to the will, a copy of which is given in the [8]*8margin,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cheever v. Circuit Judge, 7 N.W. 186, 45 Mich. 6 (Mich. 1880).

7 N.W. 186 (Cheever v. Circuit Judge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thompson Will
206 A.2d 21 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1965)
Moll v. Goedeke
25 N.E.2d 258 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1940)
In Re Will of Hough
251 P. 711 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1926)
Cowan v. Beans
144 N.W. 1129 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1914)