Truby v. Steele
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 164, April T., 1909, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Armstrong Co., Sept. Term, 1906, No. 89, for defendant non obstante veredicto in case of Margaret W. Truby v. Hiram S. Steele. Ejectment for land in Apollo borough. Before Patton, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was in entering judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Beaver, J.,
It was held in Cobaugh’s Appeal, 24 Pa. 143, that “The law limiting the lien of a decedent’s debts does not apply to the compensation earned by and allowed to the executor or administrator. That compensation is not a debt of the decedent, but a part of the expenses of administration. The right to it may accrue after the seven years have expired. The whole scope and spirit of the act show that it was intended to prevent heirs and purchasers from being surprised by claims against the decedent himself, not placed on record in proper time. An executor may retain his…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Spencer v. JenningsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887
- Demmy's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1862
- Reynold's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Cobaugh's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1854
- Crawford's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.