Ellicott v. Kuhl
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
On appeal from the Hunterdon county orphans court. The following is the agreed statement of the facts presented to the orphans court, upon which its decree was made, and upon which this appeal is based, no written evidence being taken down in the orphans court: 1. John E. Case died intestate in Hunterdon county in 1863, and John L. Bush and Peter H. Baker were appointed his administrators. 2. As such administrators they received $283.73 to invest for his widow during her…
Read the full summary
On appeal from the Hunterdon county orphans court. The following is the agreed statement of the facts presented to the orphans court, upon which its decree was made, and upon which this appeal is based, no written evidence being taken down in the orphans court: 1. John E. Case died intestate in Hunterdon county in 1863, and John L. Bush and Peter H. Baker were appointed his administrators. 2. As such administrators they received $283.73 to invest for his widow during her life and after her death to be paid to his heirs. 3. This was invested on bond and mortgage and interest paid to the widow.…
1Opinion of the Court
Magie, Ordinary.
From the agreed state of the ease it appears that Peter H. Baker, the survivor of the two administrators of John E. Case, received payment of a mortgage in which the administrators had invested funds of the estate upon which Case’s widow was entitled to interest for her life, and at her death the principal was to be paid to Case’s heirs-at-law.
The money secured by the mortgage was paid to Baker in 1878, who died intestate in 1893, and his estate is insolvent.
The respondent, who is the administrator de bonis non of Case, has obtained a decree of the orphans court on the agreed…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Empire State Surety Co. v. Carroll CountyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1912
- City of Lincoln v. MorrisonNebraska Supreme Court · 1902
- Bank Commissioners v. Security Trust Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1900
- Glidden Admx. v. GuteliusSupreme Court of Florida · 1928
- Lusk Development & Improvement Co. v. GiintherWyoming Supreme Court · 1925
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.