Van Wagner & Yeoman v. Chapman's Adm'r
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Probate Court of Dallas. IN the matter of the estate of Leroy W. Chapman, deceased, which was regularly declared insolvent, and against which the appellants and others filed their claims as creditors, within the time allowed by law. The material facts shown by the bill of exceptions are as follows : The claims filed by the appellants were debts against the firm of L. W. Chapman & Co., of which the decedent was a partner.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Probate Court of Dallas. IN the matter of the estate of Leroy W. Chapman, deceased, which was regularly declared insolvent, and against which the appellants and others filed their claims as creditors, within the time allowed by law. The material facts shown by the bill of exceptions are as follows : The claims filed by the appellants were debts against the firm of L. W. Chapman & Co., of which the decedent was a partner. On these claims, suits were instituted against the surviving partner of the firm, judgments rendered, executions issued thereon, and returned ‘no property…
1Opinion of the Court
BICE, 0. J.
In Smith v. Mallory, 24 Ala. R. 628, and in Bridge v. McCullough’s Adm’r, 27 Ala. R. 661, this court deliberately approved the rule, that the joint creditors shall be first paid out of the joint estate, and the separate creditors shall be first paid out of the separate estate of each partner ; and if there be a surplus of the joint estate, besides what will *174pay the joint creditors, the same shall be applied to pay the separate creditors ; and if there be, on the other hand, a surplus of the separate estate, beyond what will satisfy the separate creditors, it shall go to supply any…
2Cited by4 opinions
- In re WilcoxDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1899
- Clark v. Johnson & LattimerAlabama Court of Appeals · 1913
- Haralson v. CampbellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1879
- Claflin & Co. v. Behr's Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889