TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

McDaniel v. McDaniel

McDaniel v. McDaniel, 74 So. 947 (Ala. 1917)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Alabama · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 12, 1917
Judges
Anderson, Mayfield, Somerville, Thomas
Citations
74 So. 947199 Ala. 4671917 Ala. LEXIS 207
Disposition
Appeal dismissed.
Headnotes
Homestead Allotment.. Homestead; Allotment to Widow; Appeal; Time for Taking. — An appeal from a decree of the probate court setting aside and allotting to the widow a homestead out of the estate of her deceased husband, as authorized by Code 1907, sections 4205-4230, which was not taken within 20 days, as required by section 4216, will be dismissed.
Summary
Appeal from Lauderdale Probate Court. Heard before Hon. J. F. Koonce. From a decree confirming homestead allotment as reported by the commissioners Thomas W. McDaniel appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Mayfield

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

MAYFIELD, J.

This is an appeal from a decree of the probate court of Lauderdale county, confirming the report of the commissioners who set aside and allotted a homestead to the widow, out of the estate of her deceased husband, as is authorized by statute. — Code, §§ 4205-4230. The statute authorizing appeals from such decree (section 4216 of the Code) requires the appeal to be taken within 20 days. The appeal in this case was not taken within the prescribed time. The decree appealed from was of date April 25, 1916, and the appeal 'was not taken until May 22, 1916.

It may not be out of place to say that the record and the briefs were examined before we noticed that the appeal was not taken *468 within time, and that nothing was therein found which would justify or authorize a reversal of the judgment.

Appeal dismissed.

Anderson, C. J., and Somerville and Thomas, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1922: 11924: 11935: 119222026peak 1922 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Herring v. Griffin100 So. 202 (Ala. 1924)
  2. Jones v. Hubbard94 So. 167 (Ala. 1922)
  3. Tatum v. Williams164 So. 387 (Ala. 1935)

Most recent

  1. Tatum v. Williams164 So. 387 (Ala. 1935)
  2. Herring v. Griffin100 So. 202 (Ala. 1924)
  3. Jones v. Hubbard94 So. 167 (Ala. 1922)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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