Clancy v. McElroy
| Decision Date | 30 December 1902 |
| Citation | 70 P. 1095,30 Wash. 567 |
| Parties | CLANCY v. McELROY. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Appeal from superior court, King county; Boyd J. Tallman, Judge.
Petition by George E. Clancy for the removal of James F. McElroy as executor of the will of Thomas Clancy, deceased. From an order denying the petition, the petitioner appeals. Affirmed.
Root Palmer & Brown, for appellant.
John B Hart, for respondent.
Thomas Clancy died testate in King county, leaving a valuable estate.
In the will 19 legatees received bequests, among whom was the appellant, who received $15,000. The will appointed the respondent executor, who thereupon duly qualified and received his letters as such executor. The appellant thereafter instituted this proceeding to remove the executor and prayed that some suitable person might be appointed administrator of the estate to administer the same under the provisions of the will. The cause for such removal, upon which the case is brought here for review, was failure of the executor to file the inventory of the estate within the time prescribed by section 6201, Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St which reads as follows: 'EVERY EXECUTOR AND ADMINISTRATOR SHALL Make and return, upon oath, into the court, within one month after his appointment, a true inventory of the real and personal estate of the deceased, which shall come to his possession or knowledge.' The facts, as they appeared on the hearing, were that the executor secured an order extending the time for filing the inventory for 30 days; that he, within the extended time, made out and verified such inventory, but through accident and inadvertence such inventory was not formally filed in the court until after the time prescribed for filing the same by the statute had lapsed; that after the commencement of this proceeding, and upon notice of the same, the executor immediately filed the inventory which had been so prepared and verified. Section 6208, Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St., provides as follows: 'If any executor or administrator shall neglect or refuse to return the inventory within the period prescribed, or within such further time, not exceeding three months, as the court shall allow, the court shall revoke the letters testamentary or of administration; and the executor or administrator shall be liable on his bond to any party interested for the injury sustained by the estate through his neglect.' Appellant urges...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Rice
...[are] used according to the context and intent found in the statute, and are frequently construed interchangeably.” Clancy v. McElroy, 30 Wash. 567, 568–69, 70 P. 1095 (1902); see also Niichel, 97 Wash.2d at 625, 627, 647 P.2d 1021 (use of “shall” in specifying the timing of assessment proc......
-
Hartt's Estate, In re
...it somewhat difficult to file a minute inventory before that time. We think the foregoing contention is without merit. See Clancy v. McElroy, 30 Wash. 567, 70 P. 1095; Willoughby v. Willoughby, 203 Ala. 138, 82 So. 168; In re Graber's Estate, 111 Cal. 432, 44 P. 165; 21 Am.Jur. Section 6-20......
-
Elliott, In re, 39278
...notwithstanding the use of the word 'shall.' This principle has been adopted in a long line of cases. It was applied in Clancy v. McElroy, 30 Wash. 567, 70 P. 1095 (1902), and has been repeatedly applied elsewhere. State v. Doe, 149 Conn. 216, 178 A.2d 271, 277 (1962); In re Laub, 145 Pa.Su......
-
Hanna v. Sheetz
... ... v. Cooper, 4 P.2d 64, 155 Okla. 73. Fagor v. Robins, ... 117 So. 863, 96 Fla. 91. Clancey v. McElroy, 30 ... Wash. 567, 70 P. 1095. Bowyer v. Onion, 108 Ill.App ... 612. Burns v. Henderson, 20 Ill. 264. Wheeler v ... Chicago, 24 Ill. 105. Fowler ... ...