(Download) "In Re Wilcox Estate" by Supreme Court of Montana ~ Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: In Re Wilcox Estate
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 21, 1949
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 56 KB
Description
1. Executors and administrators ? Administrative preference statute mandatory. The statute providing that administration of estates of all persons dying intestate must be granted to certain individuals who were entitled to preference in the order named, was the exclusive and mandatory method for the selection of an administrator. 2. Executors and administrators ? Administrative right may be enforced. The statutory right to administer an estate is a valuable right that may be enforced. 3. Executors and administrators ? Administrative rights not inherent. Since rights of particular persons to administer estates of decedents are not inherent, letters of administration must be granted to the persons entitled in the order prescribed by statute. 4. Appeal and error ? Separately stating and numbering specifications of error. Where appellants brief did not separately number and set forth specification of error relied upon as required by rules of court but set forth in the brief such error, appellate court would review error. 5. Executors and administrators ? Effect of being sole heir. The fact that the son and sole heir claimed to be the owner of all the property of the estate of his deceased mother did not affect his statutory right to administer the estate. 6. Executors and administrators ? No forfeiture of right to be administrator. Where the son and sole heir of deceased was under the impression that there was no estate to administer until the application of the public administrator was served and filed, the son did not forfeit his right to administer the estate by not applying for letters at earlier date. 7. Executors and administrators ? No evidence that son was not a fit person. Where the statute gave the children of intestate preference over public administrator in the administration of the estate and there was no evidence that the son of deceased was not a fit, proper and competent person to administer the estate, the son was entitled by law to administer the estate.