Hood's adm'r v. Hood's devisees
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 8 — EQUITY— APPEAL PROM MADISON COURT OP COMMON PLEAS. 1. Inasmuch as Arnold had been made defendant to the original petition, and process executed upon him, he was already in court, and it was neither necessary nor proper to take out process upon the amended petition, which set forth-that Arnold claimed a debt against decedent’s estate of $9,000. ' 2. It was the duty of tlie administrator to bring all persons setting up claims against the estate before the court to…
Read the full summary
Case 8 — EQUITY— APPEAL PROM MADISON COURT OP COMMON PLEAS. 1. Inasmuch as Arnold had been made defendant to the original petition, and process executed upon him, he was already in court, and it was neither necessary nor proper to take out process upon the amended petition, which set forth-that Arnold claimed a debt against decedent’s estate of $9,000. ' 2. It was the duty of tlie administrator to bring all persons setting up claims against the estate before the court to present them. Process being served upon them, if they fail or refuse to present their demands, they are barred. 1. The…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HxlRGIS
delivered the opinion of the court.
Mrs. Hood, having made her will and devised her estate to Mrs. Little and l^frs. Arnold, who were her only children, died, leaving considerable real property, but little personal property, and some debts unpaid.
Mrs. Little was appointed administratrix, and brought this suit against Mrs. Arnold and her husband, James H. Arnold, and one of the creditors of the decedent, for the purpose of settling her accounts, paying the debts, and dividing the estate in pursuance of the provisions of the will.
She alleged that the defendant, James H. Arnold, had…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Massie v. PaulCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1936
- Ross v. Fox's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1926
- Parker v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928