Estate of Guernsey v. Pennington
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Henley, C. J.
Appellee has moved to dismiss this appeal, for the reasons that the record fails to show that the *120 appeal is prosecuted by any proper person, and that the assignment of errors does not contain the full names of tbe parties. Appellee’s objection is well taken. It is a well-established rule in the courts of appeal in this State that the estate of a dead man can not be a party to an action without some representative. To this effect are the’ following decisions: Estate of Peden v. Noland, 45 Ind. 354 ; Estate of Wells v. Wells, 71 Ind. 509 ; Estate of Thomas v. Service, 90 Ind. 128 ; Dunn v. Estate of Evans, 28 Ind. App. 447 , and in the recent case of Whisler v. Whisler, 162 Ind. 136 , the same rule was announced, and the cases heretofore mentioned were cited with approval.
The appeal is dismissed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.