(DOWNLOAD) "In Re Baxters Estate" by Supreme Court of Montana # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: In Re Baxters Estate
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 11, 1936
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 65 KB
Description
Descent and Distribution ? Proceedings to Establish Heirship ? District Court ? Probate Jurisdiction ? Res Judicata ? Statutes and Statutory Construction. District Courts ? Probate Jurisdiction ? Heirship Proceedings ? Constitution. 1. The district court, when sitting in probate, is a court of record exercising general jurisdiction by virtue of the Constitution; it is not one of limited jurisdiction, and in heirship proceedings has all the power and jurisdiction made inherent in district courts by the Constitution and statutes. Descent and Distribution ? Determination of Heirship ? Nature of Proceeding ? Decree ? When Res Judicata. 2. A decree in a proceeding to determine heirship, one in rem, not appealed from, was res judicata binding on all the world, including lost, unknown or absent heirs. - Page 505 Statutes and Statutory Construction ? Courts not Authorized to Read Something into or Out of Statute ? Determination of Heirship. 3. In the construction of a statute it is not permissible to read something into or out of it to make it understandable or workable, but in construing an Act such as the chapter on Determination of Heirship (secs. 10324-10326, Rev. Codes 1921), a construction must be adopted that will give effect to all of its provisions. Descent and Distribution ? Determination of Heirship ? Extent of Jurisdiction of Court Sitting in Probate. 4. Held, that the district court sitting in probate to determine heirship, has jurisdiction under sections 10324-10326, Revised Codes, not only to ascertain and determine the rights of heirs and individuals who may take by succession or will, but also those of all others who claim rights by virtue of assignments from heirs. Same ? Determination of Heirship ? Failure of Heirs to Attack Assignments of Interest for Fraud Held to Bar Attack on Subsequent Decree of Distribution. 5. Failure of heirs to attack assignments of their interests and powers of attorney for extrinsic fraud in proceedings to establish heirship, decree in which was not entered until about a year and a half after they had been begun, precluded attack thereon in the subsequent proceeding for distribution, in view of the provision of the statute (sec. 10326, Rev. Codes 1921) declaring that the final determination of the court in the heirship proceedings shall be conclusive in the distribution of the estate. (This ruling not to be understood that interested parties have no recourse on the ground of extrinsic fraud.)