Notes of Decisions
In Re the Est. of Morine, 363 A.2d 700 (Me. 1976).
· cites it 3× “, purporting to appeal strictly in his capacity as executor, was not a “person aggrieved” by the decree granting a widow’s allowance and, hence, not entitled to appeal pursuant to 4 M.R.S.A. § 401; (2) in any event, the appeal was not perfected because there had been no…”
Vanasse v. Labrecque, 381 A.2d 269 (Me. 1977).
· cites it 4× “Appellant learned of the sale in October of 1970, but he did not appeal to the supreme court of probate pursuant to 4 M.R.S.A. section 401 or 403. Under these circumstances he cannot attack the probate court's interpretation of the law in an action in Superior Court to set aside…”
Sevigny v. Home Builders Ass'n of Maine, Inc., 429 A.2d 197 (Me. 1981).
“, express statutory requirements in the following: 4 M.R.S.A. § 401 (1979) (former statute governing appeals from Probate Court to Supreme Court of Probate); 5 M.”
In Re Will of Edwards, 210 A.2d 17 (Me. 1965).
· cites it 2× “153, § 32 (now 4 M.R.S.A. § 401). The issues raised by the petition of the executors seeking instructions for the distribution of the residue are: first, whether the residue was a class gift or a gift to individuals; *143 and second, if the latter, whether the appellants,…”
State v. Drown, 447 A.2d 466 (Me. 1982).
“§ 1851 (1980) (civil appeals from Superior Court); 4 M.R.S.A. § 401 (1979) (appeals from probate courts to Superior Court under former statute).”
In Re Reben, 342 A.2d 688 (Me. 1975).
· cites it 2× “The problem, if there be one, should be addressed to the legislative branch of government.”
Est. of Blouin, 490 A.2d 1212 (Me. 1985).
“4 M.R.S.A. § 401 (1979), which vested the Superior Court with appellate jurisdiction over probate matters as the Supreme Court of Probate, was repealed by the enactment of the Probate Code.”
Akins v. Firstbank, N.A., 415 A.2d 567 (Me. 1980).
“The Superior Court also found that plaintiff’s action could not be saved even if it were construed as an appeal, since an appeal from a probate court decision must be brought within twenty days of the decision, 4 M.”
Est. of Lerman, 451 A.2d 640 (Me. 1982).
· cites it 3× “On January 25, 1980, appellant Joseph Lerman filed with the Probate Court an appeal and reasons for appeal, pursuant to 4 M.R.S.A. § 401 (1979), 1 and on the same date the matter was docketed in the Superior Court.”
Knight v. Radomski, 414 A.2d 1211 (Me. 1980).
“4 M.R.S.A. § 401 (1979).8 Defendant’s proper procedure, if she could not obtain the guardian’s consent, would have been to seek relief from the Hancock County probate court by filing a motion stating grounds for modification of .”
O'GRADY v. Partridge, 319 A.2d 115 (Me. 1974).
· cites it 2× “From the probate proceedings and the records of the Superior Court (Supreme Court of Probate, 4 M.R.S.A. § 401) the following facts emerge: William J.”
In Re Leonard, 321 A.2d 486 (Me. 1974).
“4 M.R.S.A. § 401. Since she was not a beneficiary under the will and since the residuary devisee thereunder was not an heir-at-law, it is clear that appellant is an aggrieved party and, therefore, the Supreme Court of Probate had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.