In Andrews v. Andrews, no trust was created by the will; but the bequest was outright to existing corporations, themselves parties to the suit, and capable of representing their own interests; and under such circumstances there would seem to have been no reason why the executor should have incurred any expense in the matter.
Summary of this case from McArthur v. ScottNo. 2050099.
June 16, 2006.
Decisions of the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals Without Opinions Affirmed.
In Andrews v. Andrews, no trust was created by the will; but the bequest was outright to existing corporations, themselves parties to the suit, and capable of representing their own interests; and under such circumstances there would seem to have been no reason why the executor should have incurred any expense in the matter.
Summary of this case from McArthur v. ScottIn Bradford v. Andrews, above referred to, decided in 1870, it was held that where a proceeding to contest the validity of a will was commenced, within the statutory period of limitation, by some of the heirs only, the right of action was saved to other heirs who were ultimately made parties, and who by their answers joined in the prayer to set aside the will, although they were not brought into the case until after the period of limitation had expired.
Summary of this case from McArthur v. ScottFull title:Bradford Co. Food Brokers, Inc. v. J. Eddie Andrews
Court:Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
Date published: Jun 16, 2006
See Singleton v. Singleton, 8 B. Monroe, 340; Hunt v. Acre, 28 Ala. 580; Scott v. Calvit, 3 How. (Miss.) 148;…
Gresham v. TalbotIn this respect, will contests are sui generis, and as is evident from the reason of the case, all that is…