Nelson v. Russell's Administrators
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to Cooper Circuit Court. 1. The law fixes the class to which demands belong, against the estates of deceased persons, and by law all demands, legally exhibited Within one year from the date of the letters of administration, properly belong to the fifth class: Revised Code 1835 and 1845, title administrations, art. 4, secs. 1 and 5. 2. It is not necessary that the demand should be allowed within twelve months from the date of the letters of administration, nor that it…
Read the full summary
ERROR to Cooper Circuit Court. 1. The law fixes the class to which demands belong, against the estates of deceased persons, and by law all demands, legally exhibited Within one year from the date of the letters of administration, properly belong to the fifth class: Revised Code 1835 and 1845, title administrations, art. 4, secs. 1 and 5. 2. It is not necessary that the demand should be allowed within twelve months from the date of the letters of administration, nor that it should be presented for allowance within that timé. To place the demand in the 5th class, it is only requisite to give…
1Opinion of the CourtScott, J.
Thomas W. Nelson was security on a bond executed by the intestate, J. W. Russell, for a thousand dollars payable to himself, Jordan O’Bryan and Win. H. Trigg, trustees of Margaret Russell. J. H. Russell, having departed this life on the 19th September, 1843, Wm. H. Trigg and Thos. Russell became his administrators. Trigg was the active administrator and took upon himself the collection of the debts due the estate. On the 8th August 1845, Trigg, as one of the payees of the bond due by Nelson as security for J. W. Russell, presented the same to the court of probate for allowance. The demand was…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Ritchey v. WithersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880