Hull v. Neal

27 Miss. 424
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1854
StatusPublished

This text of 27 Miss. 424 (Hull v. Neal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hull v. Neal, 27 Miss. 424 (Mich. 1854).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Fisher

delivered the opinion of the court.

The appellant, in virtue of his office of sheriff of Kemper county, was appointed by the probate court of said county administrator of the estate of one John Neal, deceased, under the provisions of the act of 1846, Hutch. Co. 680.

This law, so far as it related to Kemper county, was repealed by the act of 1852. Acts of that year, 232.

In October, 1852, the appellee, a son of the intestate, peti[425]*425tioned the court to be appointed administrator de bonis non on said estate; whereupon the court made the appointment.

It is objected, on the part of the appellant, that the appointment was made without giving timely notice of the application, and that the court had no authority to make the appointment until the appellant settled, his accounts, &c., as provided in the act of 1852.

The appellant was appointed in virtue of his office of sheriff; and when the law was repealed, while it did not ipso facto revoke the letters of administration, it gave the probate court power to do so at any time, and to commit the administration to the person entitled to the same by law. It may indeed be plausibly argued, and supported by high authority, that independent of the act of 1852, the court could, on the application of a distributee of the estate, revoke the letters granted to the sheriff, and grant administration to such distributee. Thompson v. Hucket, 2 Hill, S. C. R. 347.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
27 Miss. 424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hull-v-neal-miss-1854.