Ernestine v. Prather v. District of Columbia

D.C. Circuit

Ernestine v. Prather v. District of Columbia

393 F.2d 665, 129 U.S. App. D.C. 264, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7732

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMarch 13, 1968

Docket21216_1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 393 F.2d 665 (Ernestine v. Prather v. District of Columbia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ernestine v. Prather v. District of Columbia, 393 F.2d 665, 129 U.S. App. D.C. 264, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7732 (D.C. Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant sisters claimed as heirs-at-law of an intestate decedent yclept Eddie Burl. He had been reared as their brother in the home of their parents and had been described over the years, routinely and consistently, as adopted. However there was never a documentation of adoption or a formal proceeding to that end. District Judge Matthews rejected the claims of the sisters and sustained^ escheat to the District of Columbia. She filed with her ruling a careful opinion. 1 Upon the premises there stated and discussed, we affirm.

Affirmed.

1

. In re Estate of McConnell, 268 F.Supp. 346 (D.D.C.1967).

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant sisters claimed as heirs-at-law of an intestate decedent yclept Eddie Burl. He had been reared as their brother in the home of their parents and had been described over the years, routinely and consistently, as adopted. However there was never a documentation of adoption or a formal proceeding to that end. District Judge Matthews rejected the claims of the sisters and sustained^ escheat to the District of Columbia. She filed with her ruling a careful opinion. 1 Upon the premises there stated and discussed, we affirm.

Affirmed.

1

. In re Estate of McConnell, 268 F.Supp. 346 (D.D.C.1967).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

393 F.2d 665, 129 U.S. App. D.C. 264, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7732, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ernestine-v-prather-v-district-of-columbia-cadc-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack