In re Pound's Estate

Decision Date17 December 1901
Citation166 Mo. 419,66 S.W. 273
CourtMissouri Supreme Court
PartiesIn re POUND'S ESTATE. POUND et al. v. CASSITY.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL>

Appeal from circuit court, Linn county; Jno. P. Butler, Judge.

Motion by James S. Pound and others, as assignees of the right of the widow of Presley Pound, deceased, to a child's share in the personal estate, for a partial distribution by Armstrong Cassity, as executor of the decedent. From a judgment of the circuit court affirming a judgment of the probate court granting the motion, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

This is a motion by the assignees of the right of the widow of Presley Pound to a child's share in the personal estate for an order of partial distribution. The probate court ordered the distribution. The executor appealed to the circuit court, where a like order was entered, and the executor appealed to this court.

The facts are these: On December 6, 1897, the will of Presley Pound, deceased, was admitted to probate. On the 22d of December, 1897, the widow renounced the will, and elected to take dower in the real estate, and a child's share in the personal property. The court allowed and the executor paid the widow $400 as her absolute property, as provided by section 106, Rev. St. 1899. On the 26th of April, 1898, the widow conveyed and assigned her dower in the real estate and her share in the personal property to James S. and John M. Pound. On the 14th of February, 1899, the executor filed his first annual settlement, which showed that the assets collected amounted to $32,986, and that the disbursements amounted to $23,154.03, leaving a balance in his hands of $9,831.97. The deceased left six children by a former marriage, to wit, Sarah Hawkins, P. B. Pound, J. S. Pound, J. M. Pound, Josephine Cassity, the wife of the executor, and Martha Mathews, and the widow of the second marriage, Mary M. Pound. The $23,154.03 disbursements included the following sums paid by the executor to the children and widow: To Sarah Hawkins, the sum of $4,153.93; to P. B. Pound, the sum of $4,153.93; to J. S. Pound, the sum of $4,153.93; to Josephine Cassity, the sum of $4,203.18; to J. M. Pound, the sum of $2,228.50; to Mary M. Pound, widow, the sum of $400; and to Martha Mathews, nothing; making the total distribution to the widow and legatees, $19,293.47. The probate court found that a portion of the $9,831.97, balance on hand, could be distributed without prejudice to any one, as contemplated by section 239, Rev. St. 1889, and accordingly ordered the executor to retain $966, and to distribute the $8,835.97 of the $9,831.97 balance on hand as follows: "To J. M. Pound and J. S. Pound, assignees of Mary M. Pound, widow, the sum of $3,618.49; to Martha Mathews, legatee, the specific legacy of twenty-five dollars ($25); to Sarah Hawkins, legatee, the sum of $663.26; to P. B. Pound, legatee, the sum of $663.26; to J. S. Pound, legatee, the sum of $663.26; to Josephine Cassity, legatee, the sum of $614.01; to J. M. Pound, legatee, the sum of $2,588.69. It is further ordered that the executor deliver to Martha Mathews all the notes and evidences of debt, of every kind, due by her to said estate, now in his possession." When the case was tried in the circuit court the evidence developed the fact that the executor had paid the children the amounts specified in the settlement as a part of their legacies before the expiration of two years from the date of his letters, and did not require a refunding bond from them, but that he had paid the widow nothing, except the $400, because he did not think she was entitled to anything, and that he had never demanded a refunding bond from her. It also appeared that all the known debts of the estate had been paid, and that there were no more expenses to be incurred, except the cost of administration, and that the executor was receiving the rent of the real estate in addition to the $966 he was ordered to retain. The circuit court rendered judgment similar to that rendered by the probate court, and the executor appealed.

C. C. Bigger, H. Lander, and E. R. Stephens, for appellant. A. W. Mullins, for respondents.

MARSHALL, J. (after stating the facts).

The defendant contends that the order of partial distribution is premature, and that under section 238, Rev. St. 1889 (section 239, Rev. St. 1899), he could not be compelled to make distribution within two years after the date of his letters unless a refunding bond is given to him by the distributees. Section 238, Rev. St. 1899, provides that executors cannot be compelled to pay legacies until one year after the date of the letters, unless the legacies would be perishable or subject to injury if retained one year. Section 239 provides that no executor shall be compelled to pay legacies or make distribution within two years from the date of the letters, unless bond and security be given by the legatee or distributee to refund his due proportion of any debt which may afterwards be established against the estate, and the costs attending the recovery thereof. Section 240 provides that, "if upon any settlement it appear that there is sufficient money to satisfy all the demands against the estate, the court shall order the payment of legacies and distribution of shares, as in the case of debts, except that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Connolly v. St. Joseph Press Printing Company
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • January 13, 1902
    ... ... of machines it is about forty times; one pound pressure on ... the tight pulley would be equivalent to forty pounds pressure ... at the knife; it is multiplied about forty times in that ...           [166 ... Mo. 462] "Q. About what would you judge ... ...
  • The State ex rel. Wann v. Dickson
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 16, 1908
    ... ... at the administrator's own risk, and he is bound to ... respond to the beneficiaries of the estate for the difference ... between the price which he actually obtained and that which ... he should have obtained. R. S. 1899, sec. 117; Schouler on ... ...
  • In re Peper
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 31, 1920
    ...and the surety on his bond. Sec. 246, R. S. 1909; State to use v. Thornton, 56 Mo. 325; Richardson v. Cole, 160 Mo. 372; Pound v. Cassity, 166 Mo. 419; Clark Sinks, 144 Mo. 453; Vastine v. Dinans, 42 Mo. 269; State ex rel. v. Maston, 44 Mo. 308. (3) The decision of the St. Louis Court of Ap......
  • Connolly v. St. Joseph Press Printing Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 17, 1901
    ... ... One pound pressure on the tight pulley would be equivalent to forty pounds pressure at the knife. It is multiplied about forty times in that screw. Q. About what would you judge would be the revolution of the knife itself? * ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT