Park's Distributees v. Park's Adm'rs

36 Ala. 132
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJanuary 15, 1860
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 36 Ala. 132 (Park's Distributees v. Park's Adm'rs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Park's Distributees v. Park's Adm'rs, 36 Ala. 132 (Ala. 1860).

Opinion

STONE, <1.

In this case, the prohate court of Chambers had acquired jurisdiction of the settlement of the administration, and had taken some steps therein; and, unless this case be characterized by some special equities, one party had no right, against the objection, of the other, to transfer the settlement to another court of concurrent jurisdiction. — Moore v. Lesueur and Wife, 83 Ala. 237, and authorities cited. Wo have looked into this record, and are unable to perceive any special reasons why the settlement of the administration should be transferred to the chancery court.

Without considering, in any manner, the other points made in argument,'or commented on in the decree of the chancellor, the decroo dismissing the complainants’ bill is, on the ground above considered, affirmed.

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

Related

Ex Parte McLendon
102 So. 696 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1924)
Mealey v. Bartlett
102 So. 696 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1924)
Glenn's Adm'r v. Billingslea
64 Ala. 345 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1879)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 Ala. 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parks-distributees-v-parks-admrs-ala-1860.