Duncan v. Tobin
Duncan v. Tobin
Concurring Opinion
had left the Court before this opinion was prepared, and his signature does not, therefore, appear. He was understood, however, to concur.
Opinion of the Court
Curia per
This bill was filed to settle the claims of the defendants, (the legatees,) under the will of complainant’s testator; and, in the progress of the cause, the complainant was ordered to account for his administration of of the estate. In stating the accounts, the Commissioner charged the claimant with the amount of sales, with interest upon it annually, and made up the annual balances by setting off the interest, in the first place, against the annual disbursements of the current year. The complainant excepted to the report, on several grounds, and amongst otheis, “for that the complainant having passed his accounts with the estate annually before the Ordinary, he is only chargeable with the final balance due on such accounts and with the interest on the annual balance. The Circuit Court referred the accounts back to the Commissioner, with directions as to this exception, that if, as it assumes, the complainant can exhibit a regular account of the interest received, to charge him with it at
The defendants appeal from this order on the grounds:
1st. That there is no full and satisfactory return of interest; and, in the absence of this, the mode adopted by the Commissioner, is the proper and legal one.
2dly. Because the defendant can elect which mode he will adopt, and interest on annual balances has received the sanction of the Commissioner.
The whole of the testator’s personal, and I believe some, or dll of his real estate had been sold, and the complainant had taken bonds, or notes, from the purchasers, and in his annual returns to the Ordinary, he charged himself with the gross sum received, without distinguishing between what was received on account of principal and what on account of interest, so that it was impossible, without travelling through all the items and entering into minute calculation, to ascertain whether the interest account had been accurately stated; and this was rendered almost impracticable by the number and complexity of the accounts. This is the state oí things to which the complainant’s exception to the report of the Commissioner, and the grounds of this appeal refer, and but for the necessity of referring the accounts back to the Commissioner-, on other grounds, I should not have subjected the defendants to further delay; but would, in this respect, have confirmed the report. The uncertainty, too, whether a correct mode of stating the account, which the solicitor for complainant thought practicable, would not result favorably for the defendants, was another motive, and I felt less reluctance, because, at the same time,- a large proportion of what, under any circumstances, can remain due to the defendants, was decreed to be paid.
The account stated by the complainant falls very short of the particularity required by these principles, and although it may be possible to test their correctness by a reference to the' account of sales, yet, from my own observation, such is the’
The complainant’s exception to the Commissioner’s report, before stated, seems to have been founded on a supposition that the complainant’s returns to the Ordinary, were, in themselves, evidence on the reference before the Commissioner. They are prima facie evidence as to the receipts, for he can produce no other than that furnished by the inventory, the bill of sales, and the amount of monies received, which the opposite party would, of course, be entitled to surcharge and falsify; but, not so with regard to the disbursements; that is susceptible of other proof, and must be established and vouched according to the general rules of evidence.
The want of uniformity and frequent irregularity in the manner of stating and vouching accounts before the Commissioner, has suggested this, as a fit occasion to refer to some of the rules by which these matters are regulated.
According to the practice of the English courts, all parties accounting before the Master, are required to bring in their accounts in the form of debtor and creditor, accompanied by an affidavit containing a verification of the accuracy of the schedules in which are contained the details of the account; and, if any of the parties are dissatisfied with it, they may examine the accounting parties on interrogatories. If the party asking the account sets up a charge not admitted in the account, nor on the examination of the accounting party, he must substantiate it by evidence; when that is done, either by admissions or proof, the accounting party must dischárge himself by the production of receipts, or other competent evidence, (Smith’s Practice, 111, 2 — 3—4,) and proper attention
The appeal must be dismissed; but, it may be proper to remark that, the order of the Circuit Court must be carried into effect, according to the principles before stated. If the complainant is able to exhibit a sworn account in such form as will enable the defendant readily to test its correctness by the inventory and account of sales, distinguishing between the sums received on account of principal and interest, then, and to that extent, the interest is to be set down to the account of the year in which it was received, and interest computed on the annual balance; if not, the accoun t must be made up on the principles adopted in the report. It may happen that the complainant may be able, in some instances, to state the account fully, and not in others; in that event, the rules laid down, must be applied to their appropriate classes of the items in the account — the first to those where the account is clearly and fully settled, and the last to such as are not made up in that manner.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.