In re Sturdevant's Estate

• Decision Date: 29 February 1892
• Citation: 23 A. 826,61 Conn. 465
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: In re STURDEVANT'S ESTATE.

23 A. 826

61 Conn. 465

In re STURDEVANT'S ESTATE.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

Feb. 29, 1892.

Appeal from superior court, Fairfield county; Fenn, Judge.

The probate court allowed the claims of Henry L. Sturdevant, as administrator c. t. a. of Olivia E. Sturdevant, deceased, against the estate of said Olivia E. Sturdevant. On appeal to the superior court the claims were disallowed. H. L. Sturdevant appeals. Affirmed.

G. Stoddard, for appellant.

L. N. Middlebrooke and R. E. De Forest, for appellee.

HALL, J. Henry L. Sturdevant, the present appellant, and Olivia E. Sturdevant were married March 3, 1841, and lived together until March 6, 1886, when said Olivia died, possessed of three parcels of real estate situated in the city of Bridgeport. She left a will in which, after making certain legacies, she gave her husband absolutely one piece of real estate, and the life use of all the rest of her property, and, after providing for the payment of certain other legacies after his decease, made the Connecticut Humane Society, the present appellee, her residuary legatee. Said Henry L. Sturdevant was appointed administrator with the will annexed, and in due time presented his account as said administrator to the probate court for the district of Bridgeport for allowance. Said account contained, among other items, charges for money loaned by said H. L. Sturdevant to his wife, amounting to $1,462; taxes paid, amounting to $688.24; and also an item of $4,000 principal, and $300 interest on the same, which was a note for that amount payable to the Bridgeport Orphan Asylum, and executed by said H. L. Sturdevant and Olivia E. Sturdevant, his wife, and secured by mortgage on a tract of land with north half of a brick dwelling-house standing thereon, at the corner of La Fayette and Prospect streets in said Bridgeport. All these claims having been allowed against the estate as the debts of said Olivia E. Sturdevant by said probate court, an appeal was taken to the superior court, where they were all disallowed. The said administrator claims error in this action of the court below.

The finding in this case effectually disposes of all items of the account except the said $4,000 note and the interest thereon, as follows: "All the other items of said account disallowed by this court are for money paid by said appellee, either during the life-time of said Olivia or since, in discharge of the debts contracted by him on his individual credit and account and for his benefit, and were in no sense or manner contracted by said Olivia, or chargeable to or payable by her." This clear and explicit finding leaves no opportunity for review in this court. It concludes the present appellant as to every question concerning all the items of the account except said $4,000 note and interest.

As to this latter claim, the finding is as follows: "The $4,000 note to the Bridgeport Orphan Asylum, which appears as one of the items charged to said estate, was made, executed, and delivered by the said Henry L. Sturdevant during the life-time of his said wife, for his own benefit and for his own credit and account, so far forth as the same was upon personal credit, and not upon the credit of the real estate mortgaged to secure the same, which stood in the name of said Olivia, in consequence of which fact she joined with him in the execution of said note and of the mortgage. The items in said account claimed as interest paid on said $4,000 note were due from him individually." The present appellant claims that this part of the finding of the court is a conclusion of law, based upon other facts appearing in the case, and therefore is reviewable here. A brief examination of this branch of the case will test the accuracy of this claim. Here was a note for $4,000 signed by the husband and wife. The husband, as administrator upon his wife's estate, charges the note and accrued interest on same over to her estate. The note upon its face shows a joint liability of both husband and wife. The...