TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Spriggs v. Stone

Spriggs v. Stone, 174 F.2d 671 (D.C. Cir. 1949)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
May 23, 1949
Docket
No. 9927
Citations
174 F.2d 67185 U.S. App. D.C. 951949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2270

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

The District Court sitting as a probate court entered an order construing a will. Although devisees adversely affected by the order were parties, they did not appeal. Devisees favorably affected by the order have moved to dismiss an appeal taken by the executor.

“Any party aggrieved by any final order * * * may appeal * * D. C.Code 1940 § 17 — 101. As a general rule an, executor is not aggrieved and therefore cannot appeal unless either the estate as a whole is affected, or else his individual interests are affected as by an order refusing probate or removing the executor or disallowing an expenditure he has made. He cannot appeal for the protection of the interests of particular devisees or legatees who are able to protect themselves by taking an appeal of their own. Cf. Barksdale v. Morgan, 34 App.D.C. 549 . Webb v. Lohnes, 68 App.D.C. 310 , 96 F.2d 582 , is not to the contrary.

Appeal dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1949: 11951: 11953: 11962: 11978: 119492026peak 1949 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. National Bank of Washington v. District of Columbia226 F.2d 759 (D.C. Cir. 1953)
  2. Seaboard Surety Company, a New York Corp., and Hansen & Rowland, Inc., a Washington Corp. v. United States306 F.2d 855 (9th Cir. 1962)
  3. In re Estate of Jacobson387 A.2d 590 (D.C. 1978)
  4. Cogswell v. Aiken82 A.2d 749 (D.C. 1951) · Dissent
  5. Cannady v. Kesterson179 F.2d 455 (D.C. Cir. 1949)

Most recent

  1. In re Estate of Jacobson387 A.2d 590 (D.C. 1978)
  2. Seaboard Surety Company, a New York Corp., and Hansen & Rowland, Inc., a Washington Corp. v. United States306 F.2d 855 (9th Cir. 1962)
  3. National Bank of Washington v. District of Columbia226 F.2d 759 (D.C. Cir. 1953)
  4. Cogswell v. Aiken82 A.2d 749 (D.C. 1951) · Dissent
  5. Cannady v. Kesterson179 F.2d 455 (D.C. Cir. 1949)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Webb v. Lohnes, 96 F.2d 582 (D.C. Cir. 1938) 7
Barksdale v. Morgan, 34 App. D.C. 549 (D.C. Cir. 1910) 6

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list