Dumond v. Magee
New York Court of Chancery
THE object of the bill was to obtain a decree for the distribution of the estate of the intestate among the next of kin, so that the administrator might be protected. The defendant Catharine Hauett was one of the next of kin, and one of the claimants of a distributive share.
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
This is not a case in which a discovery is the object of the bill. As it is merely a suit for the safety of the administrator, the object of the motion is reasonable, and it would cause great and useless delay, trouble, and expense, to send a commission to the state of Ohio, for the sole purpose of taking her answer. The case of Gwillin, (6 Ves. 285.) of Bayley v. Delvalkiers, (10 Ves. 441.) and of Harding v. Harding, (11 Ves. 159.) are authorities in support of this course of proceeding.
Order accordingly.
It was directed that the answer should be subscribed by her attorney, and…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Isle v. CranbyIllinois Supreme Court · 1902
- Powers v. WatersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1843
- Carter v. MontgomeryCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1875
- Denny v. DennyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1864