Brotten v. . Bateman
Supreme Court of North Carolina
The original bill was filed in 1818 by Brollen and his wife against Levi and Benjamin Batsman, the executors of John Ba teman deceased,- who had been the former husband of the feme plaintiff, for an account of the estate. It charged that she dissented from the will. The defendants filed a joint answer, and admitted their joint administration.
Read the full summary
The original bill was filed in 1818 by Brollen and his wife against Levi and Benjamin Batsman, the executors of John Ba teman deceased,- who had been the former husband of the feme plaintiff, for an account of the estate. It charged that she dissented from the will. The defendants filed a joint answer, and admitted their joint administration. Pending the suit, both of the defendants died; and at September term, 1820, a bill of revivor was filed, in which it was charged that Benjamin Bateman died and made Daniel Bateman and James Wood his executors,' who took into their hands the assets of…
1Opinion of the Court
Ruitin, Judge,
after stating the case as above, proceeded as follows:
Several objections are now made against the decree. One is that taken in the exception made below, namely, that there is no jurisdiction here against the executor of a deceased executor by a legatee, where a co-executor survives, unless there be collusion or insolvency of tlie surviving executor* 1 nat is not so in our opinion. It is true as to creditors of the testator. It is also true, where the legatee proceeds against a debtor to the testator. But this case is altogether dif- feretit from those. Money in the hands of the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Thompson v. McDonaldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1839