Cleveland Co-Operative Stove Co. v. Baldwin
| Decision Date | 08 January 1907 |
| Citation | 99 S.W. 47,121 Mo. App. 397 |
| Parties | CLEVELAND CO-OPERATIVE STOVE CO. v. BALDWIN et al. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Rev. St. 1899, § 728, authorizes counsel by stipulations to further extend the time for filing a bill of exceptions where the court has extended the time. An appellant was granted until March 13, 1905, in which to file a bill of exceptions, and on March 8, 1905, counsel, by stipulation filed in the clerk's office, agreed that the time should be extended to July 6, 1905, and the bill was filed June 22, 1905. Held, that the bill was filed in time.
2. ADMINISTRATORS — ASSETS — WHAT ARE — RENTS AND PROFITS OF REAL ESTATE.
Where there has been no order of the probate court requiring or authorizing an administrator to lease lands for the purpose of paying debts or for any other purpose, the rents and profits received from the lands belong to the heirs instead of the estate.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Lawrence County; Henry C. Pepper, Judge.
Action by the Cleveland Co-operative Stove Company against Charles H. Baldwin and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
McNatt & McNatt, for appellant.
The proceeding originated in the probate court of Lawrence county, Mo., by the filing of a petition therein, wherein plaintiff, an Ohio corporation, stated, in substance, that it is a creditor of the estate of W. W. Baldwin, deceased, of which estate Charles H. Baldwin is the Missouri administrator; that W. W. Baldwin was a resident of the state of Ohio at the time of his death (in the year 1900); that he died intestate, and no sufficient assets were found in Ohio to pay the debts which were there probated against his estate; that at the time of his death W. W. Baldwin was the owner in fee of an undivided one-half interest in the W. ½ of the S. W. ¼ of the N. E. ¼, section 7, township 26, range 25, situated in Lawrence county, Mo., of the value of $15,000 on account of valuable mineral deposits on said land; that plaintiff procured an allowance of a demand for $1,028 against said estate in the probate court of Lawrence county, and, there being no personal assets of the estate in the state of Missouri, Charles H. Baldwin, the administrator, procured an order of the probate court for the sale of said real estate to pay the debts; that he gave mining leases on said lands prior to obtaining the order of sale, and was receiving large royalties therefrom, and for this reason wrongfully delayed the sale of the lands and wrongfully and captiously withheld his consent to an allowance of another demand, which plaintiff had against the estate, for the sum of $1,436.25; that the lands are only valuable for mining purposes, and the taking of minerals therefrom by the lessees detracts from its value and is unjust to the creditors; that the royalties received by Charles H. Baldwin are being received by him as the agent of the widow and heirs of W. W. Baldwin, deceased, and amount to about $1,200 per month, and are increasing each month.
The prayer of the petition is, in substance, that defendant Charles H. Baldwin, as administrator, be ordered to hold the royalties and account for them to the probate court as assets of the estate, and also that he be required to hold all in his hands received as royalties and to account for them to the probate court as administrator, and in the future to collect all royalties and account for them as assets and hold them subject to the order of the probate court, instead of paying them over to the heirs of W. W. Baldwin as he had theretofore been doing. On the hearing, the probate court made an order and entered judgment in accordance with the prayer of the petition. Charles H. Baldwin appealed from this order to the circuit court, where on a trial de novo to the court without the aid of a jury judgment was rendered for defendant from which plaintiff appealed to this court. The petition is...
To continue reading
Request your trial