Difference between revisions of "Chapmans v. Chapman"

From Wythepedia: The George Wythe Encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m
m
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Chapmans v. Chapman''}}
 
{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Chapmans v. Chapman''}}
[[File:MunfordChapmansvChapman1854v1p398.jpg|link={{filepath:MunfordsReports1812V1ChapmansvChapman.pdf}}|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:MunfordsReports1812V1ChapmansvChapman.pdf |''Ambler v. Wyld'']], in [http://wm-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/01COWM_WM:EVERYTHING:01COWM_WM_ALMA21560678820003196 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'',], by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1812.]]
+
[[File:MunfordChapmansvChapman1854v1p398.jpg|link={{filepath:MunfordsReports1812V1ChapmansvChapman.pdf}}|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:MunfordsReports1812V1ChapmansvChapman.pdf |''Ambler v. Wyld'']], in [http://wm-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/01COWM_WM:EVERYTHING:01COWM_WM_ALMA21560678820003196 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia''], by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1812.]]
 
__NOTOC__
 
__NOTOC__
 
[[Media:MunfordsReports1812V1ChapmansvChapman.pdf|''Chapmans v. Chapman'']], 15 Va. (1 Munf.) 398 (1810), <ref>William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia,'' (New York: I. Riley, 1812), 1:398.</ref> was family dispute involving the execution of a will.
 
[[Media:MunfordsReports1812V1ChapmansvChapman.pdf|''Chapmans v. Chapman'']], 15 Va. (1 Munf.) 398 (1810), <ref>William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia,'' (New York: I. Riley, 1812), 1:398.</ref> was family dispute involving the execution of a will.
  
 
==Background==
 
==Background==
Pearson Chapman was directed by his mother to have her will re-authenticated before additional witnesses. Pearson took a peek at the contents of the will and was angered to find his mother granted her entire estate his brother, George Chapman. Instead of having the will re-authenticated, Pearson destroyed it, keeping his mother's deeded property for himself. George sued Pearson for the will. Pearson retaliated by attempting to evict George through the High Court of Chancery.
+
Pearson Chapman was directed by his mother to have her will reauthenticated before additional witnesses. Pearson took a peek at the contents of the will and was angered to find his mother granted her entire estate his brother, George Chapman. Instead of having the will reauthenticated, Pearson destroyed it, keeping his mother's deeded property for himself. George sued Pearson for the will. Pearson retaliated by attempting to evict George through the High Court of Chancery.
  
 
===The Court's Decision===
 
===The Court's Decision===
Line 17: Line 17:
  
 
[[Category: Cases]]
 
[[Category: Cases]]
 +
[[Category: Inheritance]]

Latest revision as of 13:40, 30 July 2018

First page of the opinion Ambler v. Wyld, in Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1812.

Chapmans v. Chapman, 15 Va. (1 Munf.) 398 (1810), [1] was family dispute involving the execution of a will.

Background

Pearson Chapman was directed by his mother to have her will reauthenticated before additional witnesses. Pearson took a peek at the contents of the will and was angered to find his mother granted her entire estate his brother, George Chapman. Instead of having the will reauthenticated, Pearson destroyed it, keeping his mother's deeded property for himself. George sued Pearson for the will. Pearson retaliated by attempting to evict George through the High Court of Chancery.

The Court's Decision

Chancellor Wythe dismissed the eviction action and granted the land to George Chapman and his heirs. The Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed.

See also

References

  1. William Munford, Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, (New York: I. Riley, 1812), 1:398.