Sandusky v. Courtney

• Decision Date: 17 February 1913
• Citation: 153 S.W. 1084
• Parties: SANDUSKY v. COURTNEY.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

153 S.W. 1084

SANDUSKY v. COURTNEY.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

February 17, 1913.

1. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS (§ 227) — CLAIMS AGAINST ESTATE — SUFFICIENCY OF CLAIM.

A statement filed in the probate court, claiming against an estate for the value of services, recited that the estate was indebted to claimant for legal services rendered decedent from July 1, 1904, to October 1, 1908, and that said services consisted of the management of decedent's entire estate, amounting at the beginning of said services to about $45,000, and at the close to about $50,000; that during such period claimant loaned all of decedent's money, collected interest, attended to the renting, repairing, sale, and purchase of her realty, examined titles, drew deeds and wills, etc., assessed her property, appeared before the board of equalization for her, paid her taxes, attended to business abroad for her, paying claimant's own expenses, gave her necessary legal advice, and generally did everything proper to preserve her estate and increase its value; and that such services were reasonably worth the sum stated. Held, that the statement was sufficient to support a judgment for claimant, in view of Rev. St. 1909, § 2119. prohibiting a judgment from being reversed for want of allegations, the omission of which would make the pleading demurrable, or for omitting allegations, without proving which the jury should not have rendered a verdict, so that the demurrable objections mentioned in the statute are waived if the statement alleges a cause of action at all.

2. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS (§ 245) — CLAIM AGAINST ESTATE — MOTION TO MAKE CERTAIN — WAIVER.

By going to trial upon the merits, an administrator waived his motion to require a claimant to make his claim more definite and certain.

3. EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS (§ 245) — CLAIMS AGAINST ESTATE — PROCEEDINGS — ANSWER.

Under the informal procedure in probate courts, no answer was required to a claim for services filed against an estate; issue having been joined on the facts by going to trial on the merits.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Clay County; Francis H. Trimble, Judge.

Action by Sydney G. Sandusky against William J. Courtney, administrator. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Claude Hardwicke, of Liberty, for appellant. Martin E. Lawson, of Liberty, for respondent.

ELLISON, P. J.

The demand filed in the probate court was as follows: "The Estate of Mary E. Dorsey, Deceased, to S. G. Sandusky, Dr. 1910. To legal services rendered deceased from July 1, 1904, to October 1, 1908 (4 years and 3 months). Said services consisted of the management of the entire estate of deceased, both real and personal, amounting at the beginning of said services to about $45,000.00 and at their close to approximately $50,000.00. During the period of 4 years and 3 months aforesaid, plaintiff loaned all of the moneys of the deceased, collected the interest thereon, attended to most of the renting and repairing of her real estate, bought and sold real estate for her, examined titles, drew deeds and wills, had plat vacated and plat drawn and filed, gave in her property to the assessor, appeared before board of equalization for her, paid her taxes, attended to business away from home for her, paying his own expenses, gave her legal advice at all times when she needed it, and generally did for her all that was proper and necessary to be done in preserving her estate and making it increase in value. Said services are reasonably worth, and claimant asks 1¼ per cent. per year on $45,000.00, making $2,437.50."

The judgment in the probate court was in favor of plaintiff for $1,300, and on his appeal to the circuit court there was a verdict and judgment in his favor for $1,986.10 from which defendant has appealed to this court.

I think the statement filed before the probate court is sufficient. It is far more complete and much more specific than either of those held to be good in Wood v. Land, 35 Mo. App. 381; Monumental Bronze Co. v. Doty, 99 Mo. App. 195, 73 S. W. 234, 78 S. W. 850; and Britian v. Fender, 116 Mo. App. 93, 92 S. W. 179.

I think the case of Sidway v. Mo. Land & Live Stock Co., 163 Mo. 342, 63 S. W. 705, has no application, and that it should not be considered as authority on the question presented here. That case was an action begun in the circuit court, where formal pleadings are required; while this was begun in the probate court, where informal statements are permitted, the statute directing that a demand against an estate may be exhibited by serving the administrator with "a notice, in writing, stating the amount and nature of his claim, with a copy of the instrument of writing or account upon which the claim is founded." Section 194, R. S. 1909. When this is done, it becomes the duty of...