Legal Opinion

Dayhuff v. Dayhuff's Administrator

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1866PublishedCited by 11 opinions

APPEAL from the Howard Common. Pleas.

1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.

This was a suit by HuddUson, as administrator de bonis non of the estate of Daniel Dayhuff, deceased, against Andrew F. Dayhuff, on a note for $209 20, executed by the latter to Bindley, the former administrator of said estate, for personal property of the deceased sold by Bindley, and purchased by said Andrew F. Dayhuff, at public sale.

The defendant answered, by way of set-offj that Daniel Dayhuff, the decedent, in his life time, was indebted to him *159in the sum of §337, upon an account, for hoarding, lodging, clothing, washing, mending, schooling and hooks, furnished Maria Dayhuff, a minor…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Merritt v. . SeamanNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
  2. Root v. TaylorNew York Supreme Court · 1822

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Potter v. EarnestIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Kent v. CantrallIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  3. Toerring v. LampSupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
  4. Carter v. ComptonIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Robertson v. GarshwilerIndiana Supreme Court · 1882

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API