Little v. Williams
| Decision Date | 31 July 1880 |
| Parties | JOHN R. LITTLE, Adm'r,v.J. W. WILLIAMS, Adm'r. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
ERROR to the Circuit Court of Williamson county; the Hon. D. M. BROWNING, Judge, presiding. Opinion filed August 13, 1880.
Messrs. CLEMENS & BURTON, for plaintiff in error, cited York v. York, 38 Ill. 522; Heward v. Slagle, 52 Ill. 336; Foley v. Bushway, 71 Ill. 386.
Mr. J. M. WASHBURN and Mr. GEORGE W. YOUNG, for defendant in error, cited Rev. Stat. 1877, 111; People v. Phelps, 78 Ill. 147; Curts v. Brooks, 71 Ill. 125.
The credit for tombstone was proper: Foley v. Bushway, 71 Ill. 386; North's Probate Guide, 177; Willard on Executors, 272.
Costs of administration must first be paid: People v. Hunter, 89 Ill. 392; North's Probate Guide, 158.
An administrator is liable for costs only in case of mala fides, or gross negligence: Burnap v. Dennis, 3 Scam. 478.
Mary Williams was widow of David Williams, deceased; and appellee was and still is administrator of his estate. The widow's award was $682; and she selected $108.10 in personal property, at appraised value, leaving $573 still due on her allowance. There has come to the hands of the administrator, in money, from sale of personal property, $185.05; from sale of real estate to pay debts, $150; from collections on notes inventoried, $40, and from cash on hand, sixty-four cents; making $378.69 in all. Section 70, Ch. 3, R.S. 1874, classifies claims against the estates of deceased persons into seven classes: Funeral expenses compose the first class; the widow's award is the second class; and all other debts, demands and expenses are included in one or another of the subsequent classes. Section 71 provides that all claims allowed against estates shall be paid in the order in which they are classed by the statute.
By this classification the widow's award is subordinated to the payment of funeral expenses only. Rector v. Reavill, 3 Bradwell, 232. The administrator of David Williams has never applied the $378.69 that he admits has come to his hands, or any part thereof, to the payment of the amount remaining due and unpaid on the widow's award; but on the contrary, has paid all other claims in preference thereto. Appellant is administrator of Mary Williams, who is now deceased, and instituted proceedings in the county court to compel appellee to show cause why an order should not be made on him to pay the residue due on the award. Appellee answered by filing a report, and objections were filed thereto by appellant. The county court overruled the objections and approved the report; and thereupon appellant appealed to circuit court. A trial in the latter court, without a jury, resulted in a judgment refusing the order asked on appellee, and confirming his report, and affirming the judgment of the county court. Upon examination of the report of appellee, and of his former reports offered in evidence on the hearing, we find he has paid out but little, if anything, that has preference to the widow's award.
It cannot be admitted an administrator may with impunity wholly disregard the statute, and pay out of the assets of the estate just such claims as he thinks fit, leaving those demands the statute has made preferred claims unprovided for....
To continue reading
Request your trial