Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

15 Ala. 495

Lees v. Brownings

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 15, 1849

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1849-01-15

Before Hon. J. A. Young, Judge. On the 23d day of October, 1845, Susan Browning, and William G. Browning, propounded to the orphans’ court of Marengo, a paper for probate, purporting to be the last will and testament of Nelson Browning, deceased. Citation was ordered to issue to Joseph L. Browning, and to- Wayne E. Lee, guardian of Deartha Lee, Yerilta Lee, and Greene. W. Lee, who were the next of kin, to show cause why said will should not be admitted to probate.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1849-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 1934

7 state decisions

301849185018601870188018901900191019201930decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DARGAN, J.

¶1The statute, in express language, requires the next of kin to be informed of an application to probate the *497will of a deceased relative, and only allows the application to be heard, and determined without notice, when the next of kin do not reside in the State. Clay’s Dig. 303. The record shows, that the minor heirs of Mary Lee, were of the next of kin to the testator, and interested with the other next of kin, in his estate. Yet the will was probated without notice to them, or to their guardian. This is clearly an error, for which the probate of the will must be reversed. 4 Ala. Rep. 242.

¶2The plaintiffs in error, claiming an interest in the estate of tke deceased, and a right to examine into the decree probating his will, filed their petition, setting forth their interest; and notice of their petition being given to the executors, and other next of kin, they were admitted as parties to the record. This is the correct practice, and entitles them to sue out a writ of error. Watson and wife v. May, 9 Ala. Rep. 177.

¶3The final decree probating the will, must be reversed, and the cause remanded, for further proceedings.

/15/ala/495 · .json · Public domain