M'Lean v. Barnard

Supreme Court of Connecticut

M'Lean v. Barnard

1 Root 462

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedSeptember 15, 1792

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1 Root 462 (M'Lean v. Barnard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

M'Lean v. Barnard, 1 Root 462 (Colo. 1792).

Pincite

Opinion

Upon a full bearing of tbe evidence and the counsel, tbe court found tbat as to tbe first reason, said Daniel tbe testator, at tbe time of making and executing, said will was of sound disposing mind and memory. As to tbe second reason, tbe court found tbat said testator did not at the same time be made and executed bis will, first make and execute a deed to said Jonathan Avery, of a part of bis lands, etc. as tbe appellants in them reason have alleged. And as to tbe third reason, tbe court were of opinion tbat it was insufficient, and thereupon affirmed tbe judgment of tbe Court of Probate.

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

Upon a full bearing of tbe evidence and the counsel, tbe court found tbat as to tbe first reason, said Daniel tbe testator, at tbe time of making and executing, said will was of sound disposing mind and memory. As to tbe second reason, tbe court found tbat said testator did not at the same time be made and executed bis will, first make and execute a deed to said Jonathan Avery, of a part of bis lands, etc. as tbe appellants in them reason have alleged. And as to tbe third reason, tbe court were of opinion tbat it was insufficient, and thereupon affirmed tbe judgment of tbe Court of Probate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Root 462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mlean-v-barnard-conn-1792.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack