Bull v. Harris

• Decision Date: 30 April 1863
• Citation: 1863 WL 3135,31 Ill. 487
• Parties: E. F. BULL, ADMINISTRATOR, ETC.v.JOHN HARRIS.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

31 Ill. 487

1863 WL 3135 (Ill.)

E. F. BULL, ADMINISTRATOR, ETC.

v.JOHN HARRIS.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

April Term, 1863.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of the county of La Salle; the Hon. MADISON E. HOLLISTER, Judge, presiding.

John Harris presented his claim in the County Court of La Salle county, against the plaintiff in error, as administrator of the estate of Isaac H. Lamb, deceased. The claim was allowed to the amount of $25. Harris, not being satisfied with the amount of the allowance in the County Court, took an appeal to the Circuit Court, where such proceedings were had, that Harris recovered a judgment against the administrator for the sum of $283, for which the court awarded execution.

The claim was based upon certain services alleged to have been bestowed by Harris, in care and attention to Lamb, at various times, in sickness. The evidence is sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.

Upon the rendition of the judgment in the Circuit Court, the administrator sued out this writ of error, and now insists that the court below erred in awarding execution, and that the finding was against the weight of evidence.

Messrs. G. S. ELDRIDGE, and E. F. BULL, for the plaintiff in error

Messrs. GRAY, AVERY & BUSHNELL, for the defendant in error.

Mr. JUSTICE WALKER delivered the opinion of the Court:

The court below erred, in awarding an execution against the administrator. The order should have been, that the judgment be paid in the due course of administration. This is the settled law in this State, as announced in numerous cases in this court. For this error the judgment will be reversed.

It is likewise urged, that the finding of the jury was against both the evidence and the instructions of the court. The account on which this recovery was had, runs through a series of six or eight years previous to the death of intestate. And the evidence shows that the settlement of the accounts of the defendant in error, were annually made during that time, and in no instance were these items embraced. His books, during the time this account continued, from its commencement till the last settlement, contained no such charge. Nor is there any evidence that they were, by accident or mistake, omitted in these settlements.

An adjustment and settlement of accounts between parties, afford evidence that all items properly chargeable at the time have been embraced. It is true, that it is not conclusive, but it requires clear and...