In re Estate of Taylor
Cases that cite this one
7 later published cases cite this decision.
- Estate of Barbikas (Cal. Ct. App. 1959)
- Vytina Society v. Phillips (Cal. Ct. App. 1959)
- Borissoff v. Taylor & Faust (Cal. 2004)
- Chandler v. Guiol (Cal. Ct. App. 1972)
- In re Portex Oil Co. (District Court, D. Oregon 1942)
- Barreiro v. Bank of Italy National Trust & Savings Ass'n (Cal. Ct. App. 1932)
- Young v. Matthew Turner Co. (Cal. 1914)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
An executor is not responsible for the loss of property so long as he acts in good faith and with ordinary discretion.
A case must be proved of clear neglect of duty in order to charge him with the loss. ( Wébb v. Bellinger, 2 Desaus. Eq. 507; William v. Maitland, 1 Ired. Eq. 92; Thomas v. White et al. 8 Litt. 184-5; Schultz v. Pulver, 11 Wend. 367-374; Rowan v. Nirhpatrich, 14 111. 12-13; Whitted et al. v. Webb et al. 2 Dev. & B. Eq. 447; Next et al. v. Pouher, 1 Strob. Eq. 170; Boggs v. Adger, 4 Rich. Eq. 412; Neff’s Appeal, 57 Pa. St. 95.)
Burch & Griffiths, for the Respondents.
The appellants, executors of Taylor, were not, under the circumstances here appearing, justly chargeable with the three hundred and ninety-four dollars lost through the death and insolvency of Michaels in New York.
Cause remanded, with directions to modify the orders accordingly. Remittitur forthwith.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.