
    STAPLETON vs. STAPLETON.
    1. A decree of the Court of Probate admitting a -will to probate -without to the testator’s widow, is erroneous. ;e
    Ebeor to the Court of Probate of Baldwin.
    Tbe last will and testament of John E. Stapleton, deceased, was admitted to probate on tbe 13th November, 1849, on tte application of tbe executor, without notice to tbe widorL She afterwards filed her petition in tbe Court of Prob|j® propounding her interest, and praying to be made a party to the record. The prayer of her petition was granted, and she now sues out a writ of error to reverse the decree of the Court of Probate.
    The case was submitted, without argument.
    JOHN T. Taylor, for plaintiff in error.
    PERCY WALKER, contra.
    
   CHILTON, J.

— The decree of the Probate Court of Baldwin, allowing the will of John E. Stapleton to be proved and recorded without notice to the plaintiff in error, who is his widow, must be reversed. The case of Roy v. Segrist, 19 Ala. Rep., 810, is parallel with this; and it is only necessary for us to say, that we are satisfied with the correctness of that decision.

Decree reversed, and cause remanded.  