Peckham v. Hoag
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Berrien. (Smith, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. Lands obtained by the foreclosure of mortgages in the hands of an administrator are considered personal assets: How. Stat. §§ 5880-3; Al-bright v. Gobb 30 Mich. 360; Little v. Lesia 5 Mich. 119 JZ/wnzie v. Wixom 39 Mich. 386; and the administrator is liable for claims against the estate: How.
Read the full summary
Error to Berrien. (Smith, J.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. Lands obtained by the foreclosure of mortgages in the hands of an administrator are considered personal assets: How. Stat. §§ 5880-3; Al-bright v. Gobb 30 Mich. 360; Little v. Lesia 5 Mich. 119 JZ/wnzie v. Wixom 39 Mich. 386; and the administrator is liable for claims against the estate: How. Stat. § 5929 ; Palms' Appeal 44 Mich. 637; Winegar v. Newland id. 370 ; Hoffman v. Beard 32 Mich. 222; Basom v. Ta/ulor 39 Mich. 687.
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.
Plaintiff sued defendant, as administratrix de bonis non of Isaac J. Hoag, deceased, for not paying a debt proved by him against the estate; the action being founded on section 5936 and the subsequent sections of Howell’s Statutes.
Isaac J. Hoag died May 8, 1874, and Allen M. Randall was appointed administrator, in which capacity he acted until February 5, 1878, collecting and inventorying assets and performing other services. At the latter date he resigned, and it appeared by his account that all of the personal assets which remained consisted’ of real estate which had been bought in nnder…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hilton v. BriggsMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by3 opinions
- Fintak v. FintakDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013
- Peckham v. O'HaraMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Lafferty v. People's Savings BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1889