Guy v. Gericks

• Decision Date: 30 June 1877
• Citation: 1877 WL 9577,85 Ill. 428
• Parties: ROBERT L. GUY, Admr. etc. et al.v.JOHN C. GERICKS.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

85 Ill. 428

1877 WL 9577 (Ill.)

ROBERT L. GUY, Admr. etc. et al.

v.JOHN C. GERICKS.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June Term, 1877.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Fayette county; the Hon. HORATIO M. VANDEVEER, Judge, presiding.

This suit was brought against the administrator and heirs at law of William Guy, on a promissory note made by William Guy and Ogden Cary, on the 9th day of July, A. D. 1865, to plaintiff, by the name of J. C. Gericks, for the sum of $100, with interest at 10 per cent per annum from date. Both makers have since died. William Guy died February 7, 1865, and Ogden Cary, on the 28th of August, A. D. 1869. Letters of administration were granted to Robert L. Guy, on the estate of William Guy, March 28, 1865, and on the estate of Ogden Cary, September 11, 1869. This suit was not brought to trial until February 6, 1874. The court to whom the cause was submitted for trial, found the issues for plaintiff, and rendered judgment in his favor for the amount of the note and interest, with costs of suit.

The cause is to be heard in this court on the appeal of the administrator and the heirs of William Guy.

Mr. J. P. VAN DORSTON, for the appellants.

Messrs. HENRY & FOUKE, for the appellee.

Mr. JUSTICE SCOTT delivered the opinion of the Court:

There is no controversy as to the facts of the case, and the questions raised are all questions of law. It is conceded William Guy died leaving $2500 worth of personal property, and real property of greater value, which, after payment of such claims as were established against his estate, descended to and was distributed among his heirs; that the administrator gave notice to all creditors to bring forward their claims; that plaintiff never filed his claim for probate, and had he done so it appears it would have been paid; and that the administrator never made any inventory of the effects of the estate, but made final settlement of his administration and was regularly discharged. It is also conceded the estate of Ogden Cary was insolvent. What was his financial condition between the falling due of the note and his death, does not appear.

On reference to the twelfth section of the Statute of “Frauds and Perjuries,” under which this action was commenced, it will be seen the heir or devisee is only chargeable with the debts of his ancestor in case the personal estate is insufficient to discharge the just demands against his estate, and then only to the full amount of the lands, tenements or hereditaments, or rents and profits out of the same, as may have descended or been devised to such heir or devisee. Waiving the consideration of all statutes of limitations, we do not understand how, under the admitted facts, the heirs in this case can be charged with the debts of their ancestor. The personal effects were sufficient to discharge all just demands...