In a message dated 10/21/03 5:35:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 71561.634@compuserve.com writes: > It would depend on if the person had an estate to leave. (Some didn't.) If > there was an estate, an administrator would be appointed by the court, I don't know this for sure, for the time & place, but have observed some of the folllowing practice in other jurisdictions, including Illinois as recently as a few decades ago. If someone dies intestate, and there is no disagreement about the division of the estate and no debts, then there is likely no court record. This would be true as well for guardianship, in days long ago (but probably not today). If there are debts, but no disagreement between the heirs and the claimant, or no estate to speak of, then a court case is unlikely & not required. If the heirs disagree, or claims against the deceased appear or are well known (like mortgages, outstanding fines, and the like), or the deceased is part owner of property or a business, then a court record is likely. Usually something has to happen to settle up the outstanding business. It may be that there are property and value "lower limits" that decide whether an estate needs to be probated, as there often are nowadays. I have been told that a claimant (rather than an heir) could cause a probate case to be opened. I haven't seen an example of this, but it seems reasonable. It would be very helpful to know exactly what the laws were in late colonial & post-revolutionary Virginia, and in the new state of Kentucky, and to what extent they were actually followed :^)

Just the other day I ordered the new Heritage Books CD with all the Henings' Virginia Statutes at Large on it (page images, indexed). $49.95. Such a deal! I recommend to everyone to own a copy if you don't have a set readily available to you. It can solve a number of questions you may have about why things were done a certain way at a certain time and then differently later. There are also many references to persons in Henings. Never hurts to take a look. -Nancy -----Original Message----- From: Cecinit@aol.com [mailto:Cecinit@aol.com] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 8:03 AM To: 71561.634@compuserve.com; VAFAUQUI-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: Dying Intestate in VA In a message dated 10/21/03 5:35:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 71561.634@compuserve.com writes: > It would depend on if the person had an estate to leave. (Some didn't.) If > there was an estate, an administrator would be appointed by the court, I don't know this for sure, for the time & place, but have observed some of the folllowing practice in other jurisdictions, including Illinois as recently as a few decades ago. If someone dies intestate, and there is no disagreement about the division of the estate and no debts, then there is likely no court record. This would be true as well for guardianship, in days long ago (but probably not today). If there are debts, but no disagreement between the heirs and the claimant, or no estate to speak of, then a court case is unlikely & not required. If the heirs disagree, or claims against the deceased appear or are well known (like mortgages, outstanding fines, and the like), or the deceased is part owner of property or a business, then a court record is likely. Usually something has to happen to settle up the outstanding business. It may be that there are property and value "lower limits" that decide whether an estate needs to be probated, as there often are nowadays. I have been told that a claimant (rather than an heir) could cause a probate case to be opened. I haven't seen an example of this, but it seems reasonable. It would be very helpful to know exactly what the laws were in late colonial & post-revolutionary Virginia, and in the new state of Kentucky, and to what extent they were actually followed :^)