Tubbs v. Barnard, 8 Div. 413.

• Decision Date: 23 June 1932
• Docket Number: 8 Div. 413.
• Parties: TUBBS v. BARNARD.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

143 So. 448

225 Ala. 435

TUBBS v. BARNARD.

8 Div. 413.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 23, 1932

Rehearing Denied Oct. 13, 1932.

Appeal from Probate Court, Marshall County; Oscar Horton, Judge.

Petition of Hattie Barnard Tubbs to revoke letters of administration granted to John C. Barnard upon the estate of William M Barnard, deceased. From an order or decree denying the petition, petitioner appeals.

Reversed and rendered.

W. T Harris, of Marion, for appellant.

Joe Starnes, of Guntersville, for appellee.

BOULDIN J.

The appeal is from the order of the probate court of Marshall county denying a petition to cancel or revoke letters of administration granted by that court upon the estate of William M. Barnard, deceased.

The decedent died intestate in 1928. At the time of his death he was an inhabitant of Perry county. He owned certain personal chattels in Perry county of nominal value, and there was no occasion at the time for the appointment of an administrator of his estate.

But in March, 1931, it became known to the widow and kindred through the Veterans' Administration at Washington, that said William M. Barnard, a World War veteran, had been rerated as permanently and totally disabled from the date of his discharge, and as a result there was then and still is due from the United States to his estate the sum of $5,922.50.

Thereupon John C. Barnard, father of decedent, was appointed administrator of his estate by the Marshall probate court.

Later the appellant, the widow of decedent, under her newly married name of Hattie Barnard Tubbs, was appointed administratrix of said estate by the probate court of Perry county.

In this situation it appears the Department at Washington declined to pay over the money to either of such claimants, until the rightful administrator was settled under the laws of Alabama.

Thereupon this proceeding to revoke the letters granted in Marshall county was instituted by appellant as a distributee of the estate.

The probate court, being one of general jurisdiction in the grant of letters of administration, all intendments are indulged in favor of the validity of the appointment. Unless the record discloses a want of jurisdiction, the presumption is indulged that the court has ascertained all the facts essential to an appointment. In such case the order granting letters cannot be collaterally assailed. Breeding v. Breeding, 128 Ala. 412, 30 So. 881.

But upon a direct proceeding, by petition of a party in interest to revoke such letters addressed to the court granting same the authority of the court to grant such letters, as defined by Code, § 5741, may be inquired into. Holmes v. Holmes, 212 Ala. 597, 103 So. 884.

"Where the intestate, at the time of his death, was an inhabitant of...