The filing of a demurrer with the answer on a separate paper does not differ, in legal effect, from insisting on special matter in the answer, as provided by Rule 10.
The validity of a will, duly proved and allowed in the probate court, cannot by a collateral proceeding be attacked on the ground that its execution was fraudulently proved.
BINGHAM, J.
In chancery the defendant, instead of filing a formal demurrer or plea, may insist on any special matter in his answer, and have the same benefit therefrom as if he had pleaded the same or demurred to the bill. Rule 10. The answer may be amended by inserting the demurrer in it. The probate of the will raised the issue of fraud alleged in the bill. There is no allegation of insufficiency of notice or other reason why the probate court, in appointing the guardian and allowing the will, did not have jurisdiction. A decree of the probate court upon matters within its jurisdiction cannot be impeached by a collateral proceeding. Gordon v. Gordon, 55 N.H. 399; Lyme v. Allen, 51 N.H. 242; Railroad v. Railroad, 57 N.H. 200; Poplin v. Hawke, 8 N.H. 124. When the answer is withdrawn, or amended by making the demurrer a part of it, the demurrer will be sustained.
Case discharged.
ALLEN, J., did not sit: the others concurred.