History
  • No items yet
midpage
Campbell v. Conner
42 Ala. 131
Ala.
1868
Check Treatment
A. J. WALKER, C. J.

The jurisdiction of the chancery court was concurrent with that of the probate court in the *133settlement of a guardianship, and the bill in this ease having been filed before the commencement of any proceedings for the settlement of the guardianship in the probate court, it was not necessary to allege any special equity to sustain the chancery jurisdiction. — Park v. Park, 36 Ala. 133; Moore v. Leaner, 33 Ala. 237.

The deceased ward having- died in infancy without debts, his interest could be represented in chancery by the distributees of his estate without an administration.— Carter v. Owens, in manuscript; Anderson v. Anderson, 37 Ala. 683 ; Marshall v. Crow, 29 Ala. 279; Vanderver v. Alston, 16 Ala. 494; Miller v. Eatman, 11 Ala. 609 ; Bethea v. McCall, 5 Ala. 308.

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Campbell v. Conner
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Jan 15, 1868
Citation: 42 Ala. 131
Court Abbreviation: Ala.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.