Whetsell v. Louden
| Citation | 57 N.E. 952,25 Ind.App. 257 |
| Decision Date | 29 June 1900 |
| Docket Number | 3,209 |
| Parties | WHETSELL, ADMINISTRATOR, v. LOUDEN, ADMINISTRATOR |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Indiana |
From the Monroe Circuit Court.
Affirmed.
P. R Wadsworth and W. Q. Williams, for appellant.
J. H Louden and T. J. Louden, for appellee.
In a statement of claim filed by the appellant as administrator of the estate of Margaret Bollenbacher, deceased, against the appellee as administrator de bonis non of the estate of George Bollenbacher, deceased, it was shown, in substance, that one John C. Whisnand was by the court below duly appointed as administrator of the estate of said George Bollenbacher, deceased, and accepted the trust, and as such administrator filed an inventory in that estate, by which it was shown that said Margaret Bollenbacher, who was the widow of said George, received from said Whisnand, administrator, $ 12.50, as a part of her statutory allowance; that she died intestate in November, 1898; that she never received any part of the $ 500 due her, other than said sum of $ 12.50; that the appellant, in 1898, was duly appointed by the Daviess Circuit Court of this State as administrator of the estate of said Margaret, deceased, and accepted the trust; that he has never, as such administrator, received any part of said statutory allowance; and that there is due the appellant as such administrator from the appellee, administrator de bonis non of the estate of said deceased husband, $ 487.50, the remainder of such allowance.
The appellee answered in two paragraphs, the first being a general denial. A demurrer to the second paragraph of answer was overruled, and this ruling is assigned as error.
In the second paragraph of answer it was alleged that in 1885, and prior thereto, said husband resided at Bloomington, Monroe county, Indiana; that in September of that year he died testate, leaving surviving him said Margaret Bollenbacher, his widow, and several children; that on the 25th of September, 1885, said widow caused his will to be filed in the office of the clerk of the Monroe Circuit Court, where it was duly admitted to probate on that day, and duly recorded, etc. A copy of the will is set out in the answer, its dispositive items being as follows: naming them, twelve in number, including those named above in the second item. In the next and last item the widow of the testator was named as executrix.
It was further alleged in the answer that said widow under and by virtue of said will and § 2505 R. S. 1881, as amended in 1885, took possession of all of said property "so devised to her," including a large stock of boots and shoes which the testator had on hand at his death, worth over $ 2,000, and appropriated the same to her own use, and disposed thereof for her own benefit, leaving the creditors of said estate without anything from the personal property to apply on their debts; that by virtue of said will and said statute, she also took possession of certain real estate described, in Monroe county, consisting of certain lots in the city of Bloomington and thirty-one acres of land; that no administration was had on said estate until the fall of 1894, when John C. Whisnand was appointed administrator with the will annexed of said estate and qualified as such; that all the personal property of the estate that he could find amounted to $ 12.50; that the personal property of George Bollenbacher at his death amounted to $ 2,000 or more; that claims being filed against said estate amounting to $ 5,304, said administrator filed in the court below a petition for an order to sell said real estate; that while said petition was pending said Margaret, widow of said testator, proposed to a bank named that, as it held a large claim against said estate, it should buy her interest in said real estate; that the bank thereupon accepted her proposition, and, in consideration of $ 1,000 paid her by the bank, she, on the 17th...
To continue reading
Request your trial