King's Estate
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
This was an appeal from a decree of the Orphans’ Court for the County of Philadelphia, in the matter of the settlement of the accounts of the administrators of the goods, &c., of Daniel King, late of the city of Philadelphia, deceased. The only item in these accounts which formed the subject of controversy, was the following. “ 1836, December.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a decree of the Orphans’ Court for the County of Philadelphia, in the matter of the settlement of the accounts of the administrators of the goods, &c., of Daniel King, late of the city of Philadelphia, deceased. The only item in these accounts which formed the subject of controversy, was the following. “ 1836, December. To amount of furniture advanced Maria S. Smith, and omitted in appraisement, ^ $1132 03.” The auditor reported on this item as follows. “ It was contended on the part of Mr. William H. Smith, that the amount of the advancement made to his wife was…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Sergeant, J.
The evidence in this case shows that the gift of the father to his daughter of furniture, at the time of her marrying, was intended as a present, and not as an advancement. It can be treated as the latter only on the principle contended for by the appellants, that every such gift by a father to his daughter must be deemed an advancement, in case of his dying intestate. No authority, however, has been produced in support of this-principle; nor does there seem any reason for saying that it never shall be in the power of such parent to make a…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Bruce v. SlempSupreme Court of Virginia · 1886
- Parks v. ParksCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1863
- Riddle's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1852
- Oller v. BonebrakeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Bradsher v. . CannadySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.