James Blair v. David E. Sloan, Administrator of the Estate of Mattie E. Brown

D.C. Circuit

James Blair v. David E. Sloan, Administrator of the Estate of Mattie E. Brown

288 F.2d 878, 110 U.S. App. D.C. 66, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5033

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMarch 23, 1961

Docket16134_1

StatusPublished

This text of 288 F.2d 878 (James Blair v. David E. Sloan, Administrator of the Estate of Mattie E. Brown) 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

James Blair v. David E. Sloan, Administrator of the Estate of Mattie E. Brown, 288 F.2d 878, 110 U.S. App. D.C. 66, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5033 (D.C. Cir. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Alleging he was the common law husband of Mattie E. Brown when she died, and that therefore he is entitled to be the administrator of her estate, James Blair petitioned the District Court to vacate its order granting letters of administration to David E. Sloan, and to appoint him in Sloan’s stead. Sloan denied that a common law marriage had ever been contracted.

On conflicting evidence as to that issue, the District Court concluded there had been no common law marriage and dismissed the petition. We cannot say the conclusion was clearly erroneous.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Alleging he was the common law husband of Mattie E. Brown when she died, and that therefore he is entitled to be the administrator of her estate, James Blair petitioned the District Court to vacate its order granting letters of administration to David E. Sloan, and to appoint him in Sloan’s stead. Sloan denied that a common law marriage had ever been contracted.

On conflicting evidence as to that issue, the District Court concluded there had been no common law marriage and dismissed the petition. We cannot say the conclusion was clearly erroneous.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 F.2d 878, 110 U.S. App. D.C. 66, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5033, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-blair-v-david-e-sloan-administrator-of-the-estate-of-mattie-e-cadc-1961.