Parker v. Robertson
Decision Date | 07 April 1921 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 204 |
Citation | 205 Ala. 434,88 So. 418 |
Parties | PARKER et al. v. ROBERTSON. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Cullman County; O. Kyle, Judge.
Bill by Marion L. Robertson, against Harry Parker and Sarah Blomberg as executors of the last will and testament of George H Parker and as legatees under the will, for the removal of the estate from the probate to the chancery court, sale of the properties for division, filing of proper inventories, and final settlement of the estate. From a decree rendered respondents appeal. Affirmed.
Eyster & Eyster, of Albany, for appellants.
F.E St. John, of Cullman, for appellee.
George H. Parker died in Cullman county, Ala., on January 22, 1918. He left a last will and testament. It was probated on February 9, 1918. Sarah S.
Blomberg, a devisee and daughter of deceased, was appointed executrix, and Harry Parker, a son and devisee, was appointed executor. Letters testamentary were issued to them.
The first section of the will directs that all of his just debts and funeral expenses be paid. The other sections of the will, material to this cause, are as follows:
Marion L. Robertson files this bill of complaint as amended. He is a grandson of the testator, devisee under the will, and owns one-eighth of all the property, real, personal, and mixed, of which his grandfather died seized and possessed. All of the other legatees and devisees of the estate and the executor and executrix are made parties defendant.
The purposes of this bill of complaint as amended are: (1) To have the administration of the estate transferred from the probate court to the circuit court, equity docket; (2) to require the representatives of the estate to file an inventory of the personal property and choses in action belonging to the decedent; and (3) to have the real estate belonging to the estate sold for division among the devisees, the joint owners and tenants in common on the ground that it cannot be equitably partitioned among them without a sale. It also asks for sale of the personal property for division among the legatees or devisees, and for final settlement of the estate.
Marion L. Robertson, with said bill of complaint as amended, filed in the court a petition in writing, verified by affidavit, stating therein that he is a devisee under the will of George H. Parker, deceased, that a copy of the will was attached to and made part of the bill, and that in his opinion the estate can be better administered in the circuit court, equity side of the docket, than in the probate court of Cullman county, that there has been no final settlement of the estate in the probate court; that no application has been made therein for a final settlement thereof; and that Harry Parker is executor, and Mrs. Sarah S. Blomberg is executrix of the estate.
When this bill of complaint or petition is filed by a devisee or legatee of an estate, verified by affidavit, and the foregoing allegations of facts are made under oath therein, it is the duty of the circuit court to enter a decree, ordering the removal of the administration of the estate from the probate court to the circuit court. This was done in this cause. Acts 1911, p. 574; Acts 1915, p. 738, section 3 of the act of 1911.
Section 2541 of the Code of 1907 permits a testator to exempt an executor named by him in the will from giving bond. It does not permit him to exempt him from filing an inventory. The will in this cause exempts the executors from giving bond, from filing inventory, and appraisement of the estate.
The complainant made application to the court to require the representatives...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wood v. Barnett
... ... of right, on the application of one or more of the joint ... owners or tenants in common. Betts v. Ward, 196 Ala ... 248, 72 So. 110; Parker v. Robertson, 205 Ala. 434, ... 88 So. 418; Lyons v. Jacoway, 205 Ala. 479, 88 So ... 597; Roy v. Abraham (Ala. Sup.) 92 So. 792. The ... ...
-
Robertson v. United States
...principle, and the Alabama cases announcing it—e. g., Crosswhite v. Bradford, 221 Ala. 219, 128 So. 387 (1930), and Parker v. Robertson, 205 Ala. 434, 88 So. 418 (1921)—are relied on by plaintiff to support her contention that Item X intends only to give the executor normal administrative p......
-
Hinson v. Naugher
...relief sought-construction and inventories-have been held relevant and proper to a due administration of such an estate in equity. Parker v. Robertson, supra; Dooley v. Dooley, Martin v. Cameron, 203 Ala 548, 549, 84 So. 270; Richter v. Richter, 180 Ala 218, 60 So. 880; Baker v Mitchell, 10......
-
Ramsey v. McMillan
... ... the inventory may be duly required by decree (Naugher v ... Hinson, 211 Ala. 278, 100 So. 221; Parker v ... Robertson, 205 Ala. 434, 88 So. 418), though this ... failure is not ground for the removal of a personal ... representative, where there ... ...