[Return to Alabama Supreme Court Cases]Genealogical Gleanings FromReports of Cases Determined in theSupreme Court of Alabama, 1820-1826On the trial in the Circuit Court, James A. Torbert, who was a defendant as executor of Strong, was offered as a witness; being sworn on his voire dire, he stated that he had married one of the legatees of the testator, and had received his wife’s legacy—that he had no interest in the general residuum—that he could no say whether the estate would be sufficient to pay all debts without abatement of the legacies—that if the debts due to the estate could be collected, the estate would be sufficient to pay the debts. The Circuit Court decided that he was incompetent; the defendants excepted, and assign this matter here as error. The witness had a direct interest in the collection of the debts and in protecting the estate in any action against the executors. Whether the legacy which he had received should be abated or not, depended on the amount of the demands or judgments against the estate. He was, therefore, incompetent. Let the judgment be affirmed. Source: Henry Minor, Reporter, Reports of Cases Determined in the Supreme Court of Alabama From May, 1820, to July, 1826 (Atlanta: 1891), pp. 256-257. |
GenealogyMagazine.com - Copyright © 2000-2013 Datatrace Systems |