Shaw v. Berry
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Wells, J., presiding. The suit was originally against Jacob M. Berry. After his decease, the defendants, being cited in as his administrators, appeared and took upon themselves the defence of the suit. At the trial, they offered the testimony of one Sands, who, being objected to for interest, was excluded. He thereupon produced a release, executed by James Berry, one of the administrators.
Read the full summary
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Wells, J., presiding. The suit was originally against Jacob M. Berry. After his decease, the defendants, being cited in as his administrators, appeared and took upon themselves the defence of the suit. At the trial, they offered the testimony of one Sands, who, being objected to for interest, was excluded. He thereupon produced a release, executed by James Berry, one of the administrators. His competency, however, was still objected to by the plaintiff, but he was admitted and testified. The verdict was for the defendants. To the admission of the witness, the…
1Opinion of the CourtRice, J.
— The only question reserved for the consideration of the Court is whether James Berry, one of the administrators on the estate of Jacob M. Berry, had, by virtue of his office, authority to release any interest which the witness Sands had in the result of the suit.
It appears to be well settled, that if a man appoint several executors they are esteemed in law but one person, representing the testator, and the acts done by any one of them which relate to the delivery, gift, sale or release of the testator’s goods are deemed the act of all. If one releases a debt it is good and binds all the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Alerding v. AllisonIndiana Supreme Court · 1908
- Gilmore v. H. W. Baker Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1895
- Estate of Barrett, Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco1899