Legal Opinion

M'Gooch v. M'Gooch

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 15, 1808PublishedCited by 7 opinions

This was an appeal from a decree of the Probate Court for this county, whereby administration of the estate of John M’Gooch, deceased, who was the husband of the appellant, and son of the respondent, had been committed to them jointly. By the reasons of appeal, it appeared that the deceased left a child, an infant, who was still living; and that the respondent was a debtor to the estate of the deceased in a large sum, upon an unsettled account.

Read the full summary

This was an appeal from a decree of the Probate Court for this county, whereby administration of the estate of John M’Gooch, deceased, who was the husband of the appellant, and son of the respondent, had been committed to them jointly. By the reasons of appeal, it appeared that the deceased left a child, an infant, who was still living; and that the respondent was a debtor to the estate of the deceased in a large sum, upon an unsettled account. The appellant claimed the administration alone, contending that, under the statute of 1783, c. 36, <§> 6, she was entitled to it, the next of kin…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

The widow, if a suitable person to administer, is exclusively entitled to administration ; unless among the next of kin there is some fit person, whom the judge of * probate may prefer, or who, he may think, ought to be [ * 349 J joined with the widow in a joint administration.

In the present case, an infant child is the only next of kin ; and he is incapable of the trust from his age. The decree of the court below must be reversed, and administration be granted to the appellant solely. For this purpose, the cause must be remitted to the judge.

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Thomas v. StickleSupreme Court of Iowa · 1871
  2. Nelson v. BelmontThe Superior Court of New York City · 1856
  3. State Ex Rel. Fansher v. GuinotteMissouri Court of Appeals · 1933
  4. Hoyt v. RotheWashington Supreme Court · 1917
  5. King v. Kerr's AdministratorsOhio Supreme Court · 1831

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API