Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re Mullen's Estate

Montana Supreme Court

Decided May 26, 1934No. 7,215Published

1Dissent

I agree in the main with the principles of law announced in the foregoing opinion, but do not agree with the conclusions drawn from the facts.

It is my opinion that the evidence discloses that the administrator, who was also cashier, stockholder and managing officer of the bank, was in effect using the estate funds as oakum for calking the seams of the sinking ship in a futile effort to save the cargo. I think it must be held that he knew or, as a reasonably prudent person, should have known, that the bank was an unsafe receptacle for trust funds long before the bank closed. He testified:

"Q.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In Re Jennings' EstateMontana Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Vanderpool v. VanderpoolMontana Supreme Court · 1914
  3. In Re Connolly's EstateMontana Supreme Court · 1927
  4. In Re Connolly's EstateMontana Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Glendenning v. SlaytonMontana Supreme Court · 1919

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