Bungard v. Miller
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
July Term, 1885, No. 119, E. D., before Mercur, Ch. J., ‘Gordon, Paxson, Trunkey, Sterrett, and Green, JJ. Error to the Common Pleas of Eayette County to review a judgment • on a verdict for plaintiff in assumpsit. This suit was brought to recover the value of personal property taken hv Henry Bungard and converted to his use, and which belonged to John Bungard, deceased. John was a son of Henry. Henry had leased a farm and sub-let a part of it to -John.
Read the full summary
July Term, 1885, No. 119, E. D., before Mercur, Ch. J., ‘Gordon, Paxson, Trunkey, Sterrett, and Green, JJ. Error to the Common Pleas of Eayette County to review a judgment • on a verdict for plaintiff in assumpsit. This suit was brought to recover the value of personal property taken hv Henry Bungard and converted to his use, and which belonged to John Bungard, deceased. John was a son of Henry. Henry had leased a farm and sub-let a part of it to -John. John died leaving a widow, the administratrix, since married, and a posthumous son. Narr, and affidavit of claim •for $340.58. Judgment was…
1Per curiam
It is a well-recognized rule, both at law and in equity, that the whole personal éstate of a deceased person vests in the executor or administrator. There is no fact in this case to take it out of the general rule. The decedent left a widow and a posthumous child at the time of his death, and he was also indebted. The heirs could not therefore distribute the property at their pleasure among themselves without administration. Roumfort v. Mc-Alarney, 82 Pa. 193.'
Judgment affirmed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Roumfort v. McAlarneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hubbard v. UrtonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1895