Booth v. Patrick
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action brought in the name of Reuben Booth, Esq. judge of probate for the district of Danbury, on a bond executed by Theophilus Patrick and Stiles Patrick, to the plaintiff, the condition of which was, in the form prescribed by statute, (p. 201.) that Theophilus Patrick, as administrator of the estate of James Patrick, deceased, should faithfully discharge the duties of his trust. The defendants pleaded performance, setting forth the condition in their plea.
Read the full summary
This was an action brought in the name of Reuben Booth, Esq. judge of probate for the district of Danbury, on a bond executed by Theophilus Patrick and Stiles Patrick, to the plaintiff, the condition of which was, in the form prescribed by statute, (p. 201.) that Theophilus Patrick, as administrator of the estate of James Patrick, deceased, should faithfully discharge the duties of his trust. The defendants pleaded performance, setting forth the condition in their plea. The plaintiff replied as follows: “That the said James Patrick, while in full life, and at the time of his decease, was…
1Opinion of the CourtDaggett, J.
In this action, it was essential to the plaintiff’s recovery, to prove, that goods or estate of the deceased “came to the hands, possession or knowledge” of the administrator, Theophilus Patrick, and were not by him inventoried. Our statute, (p. 201. tit. Estates. s. 11.) in which the form of the bond is prescribed, has so provided. This seems also reasonable ; for it would be unjust to subject the administrator to the payment of damages for neglecting to inventory such property as might appear, on an investigation of the title, to have belonged to the deceased, when the administrator had no…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Bassett v. McKennaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
- Andruss v. DoolittleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
- Universal Road MacHinery Co. v. SkinnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927