Seabright v. Seabright

• Citation: 33 W.Va. 152
• Parties: Seabright v. Seabright.*(GReen, Judge, Absent.)
• Decision Date: 09 November 1889
• Court: West Virginia Supreme Court

33 W.Va. 152

Seabright

v. Seabright.^*(GReen, Judge, Absent.)

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

Submitted September 7, 1889

Decided November 9, 1889.

1. Res Judicata Decree oF Court of Appears.

Where a question of law or fact is once definitely settled and determined by a decree of this Court, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings, a party to said suit can not by subsequent pleadings call in question the conclusiveness of the questions determined by said decree.

2. Res Judicata.

Where the question raised by a bill in equity is as to whether certain bonds and notes therein described are part of the estate of a decedent, or have been disposed of by him by assignment and delivery, as a gift to two of his brothers, and said property has by a decree of this Court been determined to belong to the estate of said decedent, said decision is binding and conclusive upon all of the distributees of said estate.

Ewing, Melvin & Riley and B. B. Douener for appellant.

H. M. Russell for appellee, Louisa Nolte.

English, Judge:

This suit is a continuation of the suit of Louisa Seabright against Charles Seabright and others, which was brought in the Circuit Court of Ohio county, and the bill filed at July rules, 1876, for the purpose of compelling Charles W. Seabright, the executor of Louis Seabright, who died in February, 1873, to account for certain bonds aud notes, as part of the estate of said Louis Seabright. The plaintiff, Louisa Seabright, appears to have been the widow of said Louis Seabright; she having been his second wife. After having made his last will and testament, in which he made some small bequests, he gave the residue of his property to Henry Seabright, Charles W. Seabright, and Louisa Nolte, and shortly before his death wrote upon the back of a number of notes and bonds assignments of the same, to Charles W. Seabright and Henry Seabright; which bonds and notes amounted to more than $22,000.00, and comprise nearly the whole of his personal estate, and were treated by said Charles W. and Henry Seabright, after the death of said Louis, as their own individual property.

At the time of the institution of said suit by said Louisa, said Henry Seabright had departed this life, and his widow, Mena Seabright, had qualified as his executrix, and as such was made a party; and the said plaintiff alleged that said Charles W. Seabright had received from said Louis Seabright, and had in his possession, all of the said notes, or, without authority of law, had distributed them in some proportion to said Henry Seabright himself, Louisa Nolte, and William Juergens, his brothers and sisters; and that at the time of the filing of said bill the same amounted to $30,000.00; and she prayed that the said Charles W. Seabright, as executor of the estate of said Louis Seabright, might be compelled to account for said $30,000.00 thus received or distributed, and that she might receive one third of the same, and that the accounts of the said executor be surcharged and falsified in respect to said $30,000.00. And when the pleadings were made up almost the entire controversy in the cause arose upon the question as to whether said bonds and notes were assigned and delivered by said Louis Seabright to Charles W. Seabright and Henry Seabright, as a gift to them, or whether saiel bonds and notes formed and constituted a part of the personal estate of said Louis Seabright in the hands of his executor. In said cause the matters in controversy were referred to a commissioner, and a large number of depositions taken, and the court, in the final decree rendered therein, "found that the notes mentioned and described in the amended bill of complaint (which were the notes and bonds above referred to) were not a part of the estate of Louis Seabright, deceased, at the time of his death, but before that...