Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

135 Ky. 29

Williamson v. Maynard

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided October 20, 1909

Court of Appeals of Kentucky · decided 1909-10-20

CASE 5 — ACTION BY B. F. WILLIAMSON AND OTHERS AGAINST W. H. MAYNARD AND OTHERS. Appeal from Pike Circuit Court. A. J. Kirk, Circuit Judge. Judgment for defendants, plaintiffs appeal. PROPOSITION. 1. The will was not signed by the testator nor acknowledged by him to be his will. 2. The subscribing witnesses contradict each other and the will is not therefore proven as the law requires. 3. Undue influence was used by W. H. Maynard to have C. W. Williamson make the will. 4.

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently April 1928

3 state decisions

Relies on O'Daniel v. Baxter · Bush v. Lisle · Duff v. Duff

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Appeal dismissed,, · Decided 1909-10-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Opinion of the Court by

Judge O’Rear

¶2Dismissing appeal.

¶3This is an appeal from the judgment of the Pike Circuit Court, finding the paper in contest to be the last will of C. W. Williamson. The final judgment became effective in October of 1907. This appeal was prosecuted January 25, 1909. Appellees have interposed and rely upon the plea of limitation of one year in such cases.

¶4In avoidance of the plea appellants assert that parts of the record were lost, and that because of that fact and other unavoidable casualty they were not able to have the transcript of the record filed in this court within one year from the time the final judgment was entered.

¶5Section 4850, Ky. St. limits to one year the period within which appeals may be prosecuted to this court *31from judgments of the circuit court probating wills. If some casualty delayed the appellants in having the transcript prepared within that time, they should during that year, and while this court still had jurisdiction of the matter, have applied to this court for an extension of the time within which to have filed the transcript. Sections 738, 740, 758, Civ. Code Prac.; Hernstein v. Depue, 65 S. W. 805, 23 Ky. Law Rep. 1498; Bush v. Lisle, 86 Ky. 504, 6 S. W. 330, 9 Ky. Law Rep. 667.

¶6It was held by this court in the case of Duff v. Duff, 103 Ky. 348, 45 S. W. 102, 20 Ky. Law Rep. 52, that the statutory bar of one year .in will cases may be available to the appellee by motion based upon proper plea, and made at or before the case is submitted on the merits. Such was the practice in this case, and the court has no option but to sustain the plea and motion.

¶7Appeal dismissed.

/135/ky/29 · .json · Public domain