Vitty v. Peaslee's Estate
Vitty v. Peaslee's Estate
Opinion of the Court
The only questions made relate to the set-off pleaded to the claimant’s demand. The appellant and the claimant’s wife are the children and sole heirs of the intestate.
The appellant’s testimony tended to show that in 1897 the claimant, as the intestate’s agent, sold a farm of hers for $3,500 and received the price in money, and this is the matter of set-off. The claimant contended in rebuttal that he fully
The appellant requested the court to charge that if it was found that the claimant received the farm money as the intestate’s agent, the burden was on him to show that the intestate was fully informed of the amount received, and to establish that he fully accounted for and paid over to her the whole of it. The court charged that if the money was shown into the claimant’s hands, the burden was on him to account for it as having been paid to the intestate or disposed of in accordance with her directions. This was a substantial compliatice with the law of the subject.
Judgment affirmed. Let a certificate go dozm.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- A. O. Vitty v. Rosill A. Peaslee's Estate
- Status
- Published