Hull v. Heimrich
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.
The writer is impressed with the accuracy of the trustee’s records. No substantial discrepancy has been shown therein. They reflect the course actually taken by the trustee. The questions confronting us herein are not of bookkeeping or accuracy to any appreciable degree; but are questions of law, as to the duty of the trustee, and of fact, as to the title of said 70 shares of corporate stock in the Pacific Warehouse Company.
Objection is urged by plaintiff to the allowance by the probate court of a fee to defendant Heimrich for his services as executor in the sum of $10,900.05, and also to the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Roach's EstateOregon Supreme Court · 1907
- Jordan v. JordanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Follansbe v. KilbrethIllinois Supreme Court · 1856
- Boehmer v. SilvestoneOregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Nagle v. RobinsWyoming Supreme Court · 1900
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Wood v. HoneymanOregon Supreme Court · 1945
- Marshall v. FrazierOregon Supreme Court · 1938
- Gorger v. GorgerOregon Supreme Court · 1976
- Hull v. HeimrichOregon Supreme Court · 1931
- United States Drainage & Irrigation Co. v. City of MedfordCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1921