Collier v. Cairns
Missouri Court of Appeals
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. The Probate Court has the same jurisdiction of demands allowed and classified by the court as it has of those against estates of individuals. — McOartney v. Garneau, 4 Mo.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. The Probate Court has the same jurisdiction of demands allowed and classified by the court as it has of those against estates of individuals. — McOartney v. Garneau, 4 Mo. App. 566 ; JBruening v. Oberschelp, 42 Mo. 276. Under the statute, the surviving partner administering may still prefer any creditor. — Green’s Admr. v. Virden, 22 Mo. 506 ; Grow v. Weidner, 36 Mo. 412 ; EoeschigTc v. Hatfield, 5 Eobt. 26 ; EoeschigTc v. Hatfield, 51 N. Y. 660; Egbert v. Woods, 3 Paige Ch. 517; Nelson v. Neagun, 66 111. 487 ; Offutt v. Scott, 12 Am. L. Eeg. (n. s.) 575. The…
1Opinion of the CourtBakewell, J.
Archer and Cairns were copartners. On the death of Archer, Cairns administered on the partnership estate. Demands were proved and placed in the first class to the amount of $66,104.29, and in the second class to the amount of $5,941.45. There were demands not proved to the amount of $10,000. The first annual settlement showed nominal partnership assets to the amount of $65,554; and the partnership estate was insolvent.
The plaintiffs Eeese, Graff, and Woods held claims against the estate to the amount of $14,273.50, which were presented to the surviving partner, who failed to pay any part of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Crow v. WeidnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Green's Administrator v. VirdenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cozad v. ElamMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Frost v. RedfordMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893