2158 TESTAMENTARY LAW. [ART. 93

and the court on hearing both sides—that is to say, the petitioner and
the grantee of such letters—shall decide against the probate, the letters
aforesaid shall be revoked, and the power of the party under the letters
shall cease; and the said will shall not be proved in any other county,
unless the decision be reversed on appeal.

Where a will has been probated after contest, such action is final and
the same questions can not be raised again in the orphans' court by other
parties, in the absence of fraud or collusion in the probate. How and when
a question of fraud or collusion must be raised. Pleasants v. McKenney, 109
Md. 292; McCambridge v. Walraven, 88 Md. 381; Worthington v. Gittings. 56
Md. 547

This section referred to in deciding that when a will has been granted or
denied probate after contest, the decision is final and the same question can
not again be raised by a suit in ejectment. Johns v. Hodges, 62 Md. 536.

Any person having an interest in the estate in case the probate already
granted should be revoked, may file a petition for that purpose within the
three years allowed by section 342. although letters of administration have
been granted. Home for the Aged v. Bantz, 106 Md. 151.

Where a caveat is dismissed before being tried and the will thereafter
probated without contest, it is probated in common form, and this section
applies. Price v. Moore, 21 Md. 373. And see Levy v. Levy, 28 Md. 32.

Where a will is presented with a petition stating that it is not the will of
the deceased, and only testimony on behalf of those assailing the will is
heard, those in favor of the will being given no opportunity to be heard, the
orphans' court is without Jurisdiction to decide the question of probate.
Emmert v. Stouffer. 64 Md. 553

For a petition filed under this section praying that the probate be again
examined, see Harris v. Pue, 39 Md. 540.

This section referred to in construing section 36—see notes thereto. Pacy v.
Cosgrove, 113 Md. 319.

This section construed in connection with section 24S—see notes thereto.
Stockbridge v. Smith, 64 Md. 106.

Cited but not construed in Campbell c. Porter, 162 U. S. 483.

See notes to sec. 345.

1904, art. 93, sec. 342. 1888. art. 93, sec. 333. 1860, art. 93, sec. 321.
1798. ch. 101. sub-ch. 2, sec. 11.

349. In case the adjudication of the orphans' court to whom any

will or codicil shall be exhibited for probate shall be against the said

will or codicil, it shall not be received for probate in any other county.

It does not follow from this section that parties not bound by the order

refusing probate are excluded thereafter from probating the will in the same

county. Emmert v. Stouffer, 64 Md. 559 (dissenting opinion).

This section referred to in deciding that when a will has been granted or
denied probate after contest, the decision is final and the same question can
not again be raised by a suit in ejectment. Johns v. Hodges. 62 Md. 536.
Cited but not construed in Campbell v. Porter, 162 U. S. 483.

Ibid. sec. 343. 1888. art. 93. sec. 334. 1860, art. 93. sec. 323. 1831. ch. 315.
sec. 1. 1S88. ch. 453. 1890, ch. 416. 1892. ch. 81.

350. In proving a will or codicil all the witnesses thereto shall be
examined if their attendance can be had, and the register of wills of
any county or of the city of Baltimore where any will shall have been
filed for probate, or any deputy of his when directed so to do by an
order of the orphans' court may examine and take the deposition of any
or all of the witnesses thereto who from any cause cannot conveniently
attend to the office of said register of wills wherever he may find such
witness or witnesses, whether within the State of Maryland or beyond