Hooker v. Olmstead
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Debt upon a bond given to the judge of probate oí the county of Hampden, by Asa Olmstead as principal, and the other defendants as sureties, for the faithful administration of the estate of David Olmstead, deceased, intestate. The defendants confessed a forfeiture, and the case was referred to auditors. By the report of the auditors it appeared, that the estate of the intestate was represented to be insolvent.
Read the full summary
Debt upon a bond given to the judge of probate oí the county of Hampden, by Asa Olmstead as principal, and the other defendants as sureties, for the faithful administration of the estate of David Olmstead, deceased, intestate. The defendants confessed a forfeiture, and the case was referred to auditors. By the report of the auditors it appeared, that the estate of the intestate was represented to be insolvent. The plaintiff alleged that the administrator had been guilty of maladministration in regard to a debt due to Rufus Flynt' This claim, amounting to 937 dollars 64 cents, was stated to…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Inasmuch as the creditor filed his claim generally with the commissioners, and a distribution was decreed upon an allowance of the whole claim, we think he waived his right under the mortgage.
It further appeared, that Asa Olmstead, after his appointment as administrator in this State, also took out letters of ancillary administration in the State of Connecticut, where he received assets by the collection of debts and the sale of land. The estate was there represented insolvent, and certain sums were returned by commissioners of insolvency as due to certain Connecticut creditors,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Stevens v. GaylordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Riley v. RileyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1808
- Bush v. SheldonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1803
- Austin v. GageMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812