Francis v. Holbrook

Supreme Court of Georgia

Francis v. Holbrook

68 Ga. 829

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 15, 1882

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 68 Ga. 829 (Francis v. Holbrook) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Francis v. Holbrook, 68 Ga. 829 (Ga. 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

1. Where a will is propounded and a<raveat is filed, upon failure to establish the will, the court cannot go further than to enter up judgment for costs against the propounder. Though parties beneficially interested as legatees may have aided the propounder by employing counsel and subpoenaing witnesses, they are not stich parties to the record as that a judgment for costs can be entered against them.

(b.) Semble, that if a will be betia fide presented for probate and not fraudulently pressed, and upon caveat the same is rejected, the costs should fall upon the estate. 22 Ga., 302.

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

1. Where a will is propounded and a<raveat is filed, upon failure to establish the will, the court cannot go further than to enter up judgment for costs against the propounder. Though parties beneficially interested as legatees may have aided the propounder by employing counsel and subpoenaing witnesses, they are not stich parties to the record as that a judgment for costs can be entered against them.

(b.) Semble, that if a will be betia fide presented for probate and not fraudulently pressed, and upon caveat the same is rejected, the costs should fall upon the estate. 22 Ga., 302.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 Ga. 829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francis-v-holbrook-ga-1882.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack