In re Belt's Estate

• Decision Date: 02 September 1902
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: In re BELT'S ESTATE.

70 P. 74

29 Wash. 535

In re BELT'S ESTATE.

Supreme Court of Washington

September 2, 1902

Appeal from superior court, Spokane county; Geo. W. Belt, Judge.

Proceeding by J. J. Brown under Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St. § 6209 to compel Martha J. Belt, as administratrix of the estate of H. N. Belt, deceased, to inventory a certain judgment as an asset of the estate. From a judgment for the defendant petitioner appeals. Affirmed.

Hyde Townsend & Tompkins, for appellant.

W. J. Thayer, for respondent

MOUNT J.

This is a proceeding brought in the court below by a creditor of the estate of Horatio N. Belt, deceased, to compel the administratrix thereof to show cause why she should not, as such administratrix, inventory as assets of the estate the proceeds of a certain judgment rendered in favor of the decedent during his lifetime, and affirmed after his death by this court in favor of the administratrix, who had in the meanwhile been substituted in decedent's stead. The petitioner (the appellant here) first became a creditor of the decedent by virtue of a judgment rendered against the decedent August 12, 1898, an during the latter's lifetime, for the sum of $1,994.72, with costs and interest. This has never been paid or satisfied. At the time of the rendition of this judgment Horatio N. Belt was possessed of certain choses in action against the Washington Water Power Company, a corporation, upon which he afterwards brought suit and recovered a judgment for $21,016, with costs and interest. The facts in relation to this last-named judgment are as follows: In 1892 the Washington Water Power Company gave to Horatio N. Belt and Isaac Kaufman and others a contract for building a street railroad, which the company never built. Suit was brought against the company for damages for failure to build the road. This suit was brought in the name of Horatio N. Belt. Kaufman's interest therein was sold to W. L. and H. C. Belt, who were sons of Horatio N. Belt. All of the interest of H. N. Belt, the plaintiff, therein, a short time after the suit was brought, was sold for a valuable consideration to his wife, Martha J. Belt, but the suit was prosecuted to judgment in the lower court in the name of Horatio N. Belt. The case was thereupon appealed to this court, but before the affirmance of the judgment by this court Horatio N. Belt died, and Martha J. Belt, his widow, was, as administratrix, substituted in his stead as a party plaintiff, so that the remittitur from this court in its essential portion read thus: 'Adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the said superior court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed, with costs, and that the said Martha J. Belt, as administratrix of the estate of H. N. Belt, deceased, substituted respondent, have and recover from the said Washington Water Power Company and from the Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland the sum of $21,016.00, with interest thereon.' This judgment of affirmance was rendered on May 6, 1901. On May 14, 1901, Martha J. Belt, as such administratrix, received and receipted for the proceeds of the judgment in full. On May 15, 1901, Martha J. Belt, as administratrix of the estate of Horatio N. Belt, deceased, returned and filed her inventory of the estate, containing no account of the proceeds of the judgment against the Washington Water Power Company, and showing no assets whatever. On June 4, 1901, this proceeding was commenced by J. J. Brown, a creditor of the estate of H. N. Belt, deceased. A petition was filed in the superior court in the estate of Horatio N. Belt, deceased, in which petition was alleged that the petitioner was a creditor of said estate in the sum of $2,001.92; that he had presented his claim, which had been allowed; that the administratrix had received the sum of $21,016, which was the proceeds of a judgment in favor of Horatio N. Belt, deceased; that Martha J. Belt, as administratrix, had filed an inventory of the estate, which inventory failed to contain any account of the said sum of $21,016, and failed to show any assets whatever of said estate; that a demand had been made upon said administratrix to include the said $21,016 in her inventory of said estate, which demand was refused; and concluded with a prayer that said administratrix be required to inventory the said sum of $21,016, or show cause why she should not do so. An order was issued as prayed for. In answer thereto the administratrix admitted that she had received the proceeds of the judgment in question as administratrix, but alleged by way of affirmative matter that the action in which said judgment was rendered had been prosecuted by deceased during his lifetime as agent and trustee for the use and benefit of Martha J. Belt and his two sons, W. L. and H. C. Belt, and that by virtue of certain declarations of trust and assignment of the cause of action all interest in the judgment thereon was in the widow and children, and that the proceeds thereof were not assets of the estate of Horatio N. Belt, deceased. The petitioner demurred to the affirmative matter in the answer on the ground that it did not state matters constituting a defense. The demurrer being overruled, a reply was filed denying the allegation of new matter, and also alleged that Martha J. Belt, having received the proceeds of the said judgment as administratrix, is estopped to deny that it does not belong to the estate of H. N. Belt, deceased. Upon the issues made the cause was tried by the judge of the superior court sitting in probate in the estate of H. N. Belt, deceased, and the court found that the proceeds of the judgment were not the property of the estate, and dismissed the petition. From this order this appeal is prosecuted.

Appellant argues the errors assigned under three heads substantially as follows: (1) Respondent having recovered the judgment and received the proceeds thereof as administratrix, she is, as such administratrix, estopped, in a proceeding against her as such, to deny that said proceeds constituted assets of the estate. (2) Assuming that there is no estoppel upon the administratrix, the probate court had no power to hear, try, or determine in this proceeding the title of third parties claiming the fund in question. (3) Assuming that the probate court had power to determine the title of third parties to the money in question, and that the evidence showed it to have been held by decedent as a trust fund, yet, having been recovered and received by the administratrix in that capacity, it had to be held and accounted for in the form in which it was recovered.

Appellant cites a number of cases in support of the first point, but upon examination we find all these to be cases where the money was actually the property of the estate, and liable for the debts thereof. They do not discuss the point whether trust funds, as such, are assets of the estate, and liable for the debts of the decedent; nor do they hold that, where an administrator receives and receipts for a fund which is a trust fund, such funds must be inventoried and held by him as other property of the estate liable for decedent's personal debts. Where a person dies possessed of trust funds such funds do not, by the reason of the death of the trustee, become liable for the debts of his estate. The relation of the cestui que trust is not changed. The property still belongs to him. While the...