Ernestine v. Prather v. District of Columbia

393 F.2d 665, 129 U.S. App. D.C. 264, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7732
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided March 13, 1968·No. 21216_1·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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

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).

393 F.2d 665 (Ernestine v. Prather v. District of Columbia) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Board of Education v. Browning
635 A.2d 373 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1994)