Cotterell v. Coen
| Decision Date | 28 October 1910 |
| Citation | 246 Ill. 410,92 N.E. 911 |
| Parties | COTTERELL v. COEN. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Appellate Court, Fourth District, on Appeal from Circuit Court, Richland County; E. E. Newlin, Judge.
Proceeding by Selinda W. Cotterell against James T. Coen, to set aside letters of administration granted to defendant as public administrator. A judgment for plaintiff was reversed by the Appellate Court (151 Ill. App. 463), and plaintiff brings certiorari. Reversed, and judgment of circuit court affirmed.
John Lynch, for plaintiff in error.
John C. Ritter, for defendant in error.
Samuel Cotterell died intestate March 13, 1908, seised of 40 acres of real estate in Richland county and about $1,000 worth of personal property. He left surviving him, as his only heirs at law, Selinda W. Cotterell (the plaintiff in error here), Laura J. Apgar, and Rebecca A. Cartwright, his children, and Harley A. Patterson, Joseph Patterson, and Earl E. Patterson, the surviving children of Mary J. Patterson, a deceased daughter. Immediately prior to his decease he requested his said children and grandchildren to settle his estate without administration, and secured from them a promise to do so. After his death a written agreement was executed by the heirs of Samuel Cotterell, in and by which it was provided that Selinda W. Cotterell, the plaintiff in error, should take possession of the personal estate for the heirs and sell the same, pay the expenses incidental to the last illness and burial of the deceased, and divide the remainder among the heirs at law. This agreement was signed by all the heirs except Earl E. Patterson, who was then a minor of the age of 19 years. One Edward C. Engledow was the then appointed and acting guardian of Earl E. Patterson, and as such guardian he signed this agreement on the part of his ward. At the time of his death Samuel Cotterell owed no debts except those incurred during his last illness, and his assets consisted of chattels readily convertible into cash. Pursuant to the agreement entered into, the plaintiff in error, early in the month of June following the death of her father, reduced all the personal property to cash and paid the expenses incidental to the last illness and burial of her father.
The 60 days provided for by section 18 of the act in regard to the administration of estates (Laws 1871-72, p. 82), in which preference is granted to the next of kin to take out letters of administration, having elapsed, and no application having been made for letters of administration by any member of the classes preferred, James T. Coen, public administrator for Richland county, at the June term, 1908, applied to the county court for, and was granted, letters of administration as public administrator of the estate of Samuel Cotterell, deceased. Plaintiff in error thereafter, and at said June term, filed in the county court of Richland county her petition, asking that the letters of administration granted to Coen be revoked, and that he be removed as such administrator, setting up in the petition the facts as above detailed. In addition to this she also asked that she be awarded the notes and moneys arising from the sale of the personal property made by her, and all other personal estate of her father which had been taken possession of by her since his decease, under the agreement referred to. The petition was denied by the county court, and plaintiff in error appealed to the circuit court, where the facts were found in the final order as they have been above detailed. By its judgment and final order the circuit court awarded to plaintiff in error the notes and moneys arising from the sale of the personal property, and all other personal estate of the deceased, directed that the letters of administration granted by the probate court to the defendant in error be revoked, that he be discharged as such administrator, and that he individually pay the costs of the proceeding. The defendant in error, James T. Coen, thereupon prayed an appeal to the Appellate Court for the Fourth District, where the judgment of the circuit court was reversed, and the judgment and record of the Appellate Court are brought here by the plaintiff in error for review by writ of certiorari.
The questions presented for our determination are whether section 18 of the administration act (Act April 1, 1872; Laws 1871-72, p....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wertheimer And Goldberg v. State
...Ind. 334, 132 N.E. 590. In Jeffries v. United States (1907), 7 Ind.Terr. 47, 103 S.W. 761, and Goldsberry v. State (1902), 66 Neb. 312, 92 N.E. 911, 92 N.W. it was held that it was immaterial whether the other possession occurred before or after the possession charged. Some of the cases sta......
-
In re Estate of Landgraf
... ... People, 10 ... Ill.App. 62; Savage v. Luther, 165 Ill.App. 1; ... Lewis v. Lyons, 13 Ill. 117; Abbott v ... People, 105 Ill. 588; Cotterell v. Coen, 246 ... Ill. 410; Roundtree v. Pursell, 11 Ind.App. 522; ... Salter v. Salter, 98 Ind. 522; Holtzman v ... Hibben, 100 Ind. 338; ... ...
-
Martin v. Cent. Trust Co. of Illinois
...269 Ill. 491, 109 N. E. 986;Headen v. Cohn, 292 Ill. 210, 126 N. E. 550;Anderson v. Shepard, 285 Ill. 544, 121 N. E. 215;Cotterell v. Coen, 246 Ill. 410, 92 N. E. 911;Moore v. Brandenburg, 248 Ill. 232, 93 N. E. 733,140 Am. St. Rep. 206. In this case there was a necessity for the probation ......
-
O'CONNELL v. United States
...and possess, when no administrator is appointed. Moore v. Brandenburg, 248 Ill. 232, 93 N.E. 733, 140 Am.St.Rep. 206; Cotterell v. Coen, 246 Ill. 410, 92 N.E. 911; People v. Abbott, 105 Ill. 588; Lynch v. Rotan, 39 Ill. 14; Weiland v. Weiland, 297 Ill.App. 239, 17 N.E.2d 625. Consequently, ......