Legal Opinion

In Re Mullen's Estate

Montana Supreme Court

Decided May 26, 1934No. 7,215PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The position of the administrator is one of trust and confidence. (2 R.C.L., p. 6.) Here, the administrator, as trustee for the beneficiaries, had knowledge that should have enabled him to protect the property of the estate against the bank's failure, and his neglect in so doing was a breach of his trust; he was occupying a dual position in that he was cashier and a stockholder in the bank and also administrator of the Mullen estate; his duties between the bank and his trust conflicted, and he shielded the bank and used his trust to protect the bank's interest instead of withdrawing the…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. In Re Connolly's EstateMontana Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Pethybridge v. First State Bk. of LivingstonMontana Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Baker v. Citizens' State BankMontana Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Kirby v. HoehMontana Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Zanos v. Great Northern Ry. Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1921

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. McCulloch v. HortonMontana Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Nadeau v. Texas CompanyMontana Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Silfvast v. AsplundMontana Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Welch v. ThomasMontana Supreme Court · 1936
  5. State Ex Rel. Raw v. City of HelenaMontana Supreme Court · 1961

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API