State ex rel. Riggs v. Colman
| Decision Date | 30 April 1881 |
| Citation | 73 Mo. 684 |
| Parties | THE STATE ex rel. RIGGS, Appellant, v. COLMAN. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Ray Circuit Court.--HON. GEO. W. DUNN, Judge.
REVERSED.
D. P. Whitmer for appellant.
Jas. W. Black and Joseph E. Black for respondents.
The statute provides that the circuit court may, on the application of the guardian or curator, and after proof showing that it will be for the benefit of the ward, order the real estate of such ward to be sold or leased, and the proceeds put on interest, or invested in productive stocks, or in other real estate, first requiring such guardian or curator to enter into good and sufficient bonds to make such leases and conduct such sales with fidelity to the interests of his ward, and faithfully to account for the proceeds of such sales and leases according to law, and as the order of the court may require. Wag. Stat., 677, § 34, 35. The question presented by the record in this case is, whether the sureties on a bond given under the statute above cited are discharged from further liability, when the curator in his settlement with the probate court charges himself with the proceeds of a sale of land made by him under the order of the circuit court, and has said proceeds in his possession at the time of such settlement, or whether they are liable for a subsequent conversion, by the curator, of such proceeds. It can hardly be maintained that an administrator or guardian has faithfully accounted for money received by him as such, within the meaning of a statute or bond requiring him faithfully to account therefor, when he simply charges himself therewith before the proper officer, and at the time has the same in his possession. In order to faithfully account for such money he must not only charge himself with it, but he must safely keep and disburse the same according to law. The object of the statute above cited was to provide additional security for the safe keeping and proper disbursement of such personal property as should come to the hands of the curator through the action of the circuit court, as well as for the fidelity of such curator in the execution of the orders of said court. The sureties on the bond given under the law would, of course, be liable only for the conduct of the curator and for the faithful disbursement of the funds received by him under the orders of the circuit court, and not for the funds received by him under the general law governing the duties of curators acting solely under...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Jones v. Nolte
... ... 718, 216 ... S.W. 949; St. Francis Levee District v. Timber Co., ... 215 Mo.App. 368, 253 S.W. 1078; State ex rel. v ... Colman, 73 Mo. 684; State ex rel. v. Keithley, ... 204 S.W. 24; Norborne Land Drain. Dist. Co. v. Cherry ... Valley Twp. of Carroll County, 31 S.W.2d ... ...
-
State ex rel. McKown v. Williams
...______. This bond is not essentially collateral or auxiliary to the first guardian's bond. Haskell v. Farrar, 56 Mo. 497; State ex rel. Riggs v. Colman, 73 Mo. 684; State ex rel. v. Steele, 21 Ind. 207. It was optional with the relators to which security they would resort. Wood v. Williams,......
-
Matheny v. Mason
... ... To this answer the plaintiff demurred, because it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense herein, and was insufficient in ... ...
-
Gravette v. Williams
...therefor, when he simply charges himself therewith before the proper officer, and at the time, has the same in his possession." State v. Colman, 73 Mo. 684. In this case it is not disputed that the purchase-money note was paid to the guardian, but that he simply charged himself with it befo......