Ernestine v. Prather v. Dist. of Columbia, 393 F.2d 665 (D.C. Cir. 1968). · Go Syfert
Search
Ernestine v. Prather v. Dist. of Columbia, 393 F.2d 665 (D.C. Cir. 1968). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ernestine
v.
PRATHER Et Al., Appellants, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee
21216_1.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Mar 13, 1968.
393 F.2d 665
Mr. Walter E. Gillcrist, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. J. Gordon Forester, Jr., Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellants., Mr. David P. Sutton, Asst. Corporation Counsel for the District of Columbia, with whom Mr. Charles T. Duncan, Corporation Counsel, Mr. Hubert B. Pair, Principal Asst. Corporation Counsel, and Mr. Richard W. Barton, Asst. Corporation Counsel, were on the brief, for ap-pellee.
Prettyman, Burger, Leventhal.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

Appellant sisters claimed as heirs-at-law of an intestate decedent yclept Eddie Burl. He had been reared as their brother in the home of their parents and had been described over the years, routinely and consistently, as adopted. However there was never a documentation of adoption or a formal proceeding to that end. District Judge Matthews rejected the claims of the sisters and sustained^ escheat to the District of Columbia. She filed with her ruling a careful opinion. [1] Upon the premises there stated and discussed, we affirm.

Affirmed.

1

. In re Estate of McConnell, 268 F.Supp. 346 (D.D.C.1967).