Administrator of Sargent's Estate v. Administrator of Kimball's Estate
Supreme Court of Vermont
Appeal from the probate court. It was agreed that the facts upon which the plaintiff relied in support of his case were as follows r John II. Kimball was appointed administrator of the estate of Stephen Sargent, and gave a bond in due form.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the probate court. It was agreed that the facts upon which the plaintiff relied in support of his case were as follows r John II. Kimball was appointed administrator of the estate of Stephen Sargent, and gave a bond in due form. Assets came into his hands belonging to said estate, and on settlement of his account in the probate court there was found in his hands the sum of $192.21, which said court ordered Kimball, as such administrator, to pay over pro rata among the creditors of said estate. It is claimed by the plaintiff that Kimball did not pay said dividend, but in part…
1Opinion of the Court
Poland, Ch. J.
From the facts presented by the agreed case, it is evident that the sole purpose of this proceeding in the probate court, was to enforce payment from Kimball’s estate of the amount he was ordered to pay to the creditors of Sargent’s estate by the probate court in 1846.
Nothing appears but that the settlement of Kimball’s account as administrator of Sargent, in 1846, included and covered all the assets of the estate that ever came to his hands. Upon that settlement an order of distribution was made of the full amount in his hands, and he was ordered to pay the amount to the…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Hantzch v. MassoltSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- In Re Estate of JeffersMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
- In Re Estate of Howard v. HoweSupreme Court of Missouri · 1939
- Austin v. Saveland's EstateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
- Davis v. DavisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.