Gansz's Appeal
Gansz's Appeal
Opinion of the Court
We concur in the decree of the court below, since an examination of the case satisfies us that it is correct.
The decree is affirmed and appeal dismissed, at costs of appellant.
Note. — The proper practice, in presenting a claim, such as that involved in the above case, would seem to be by a petition for an auditor, and not by exceptions to the account. And, as distribution by an auditor is the method pointed out by the Acts of 1832 and 1840, and is a protection to the accountant and distributees (Moorehead’s Est., O. C., 1 Ches. Co. 435 ; Barlet’s Est.. O. C., 2 Ches. Co. 456 ; and see, also, Woodward’s Est., C. P., 2 Ches. Co. 8), it would not seem to be proper to place the costs upon the petitioner. See, also, Young’s Est., O. C., 2 Ches. Co. 117, for costs allowed a claimant petitioning for an auditor.
Reference
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- The vendees of land entered into an agreement to pay the vendor a sum of money on his procuring for them releases of certain outstanding titles. The vendor obtained releases for one-half the outstanding titles, and the remaining one-half was subsequently purchased by the vendees themselves. Held, that the agreement was a severable contract, that the vendor was entitled to recover from the vendees the whole of the stipulated sum less the price paid by the vendees for the outstanding titles. [Where the creditor of a decedent’s estate does not present his claim to the administrator until the final account has been filed, two years after letters of administration have been granted, it was held, by the court below, that he would be compelled to pay the costs of audit rendered necessary by his delay, although he had no knowledge of the decedent’s death and did not see the administrator’s notice in a paper taken by him.]