Williams v. Taylor
Decision Date | 03 August 1908 |
Parties | WILLIAMS v. TAYLOR et al. |
Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, New Haven County; Howard J. Curtis, Judge.
Action by Ella S. Williams against Franklin A. Taylor, administrator, and others, for an application for order of sale of personal property held by an administrator. From a decree denying the application, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Charles G. Root, for appellant.
Lucien F. Burpee and Terrence H. Carmody, for appellee Mary B. R. Munson.
HALL, J. Archibald E. Rice, late of Waterbury, died testate in March, 1893, leaving a widow, Sarah H. Rice, and three children, Frederick B. Rice, Mary B. Munson, and Ella S. Williams. His estate was inventoried at $89,726.83, consisting of the homestead described in the second clause of his will, of the value of $15,000, and personal property of the value of $74,591.31, which included 409 shares of the stock of the Apothecaries' Hall Company, a corporation located in Waterbury, with a capital stock of 800 shares of the par value of $25 each, appraised in said inventory at $30,675, and household furniture appraised at $150.
The following are provisions of the testator's will, of which said Frederick B. Rice was the executor:
Frederick B. Rice proceeded to settle said estate, and on February 8, 1894, presented his administration account to the court of probate, which was allowed and was not appealed from, showing the payment of all the debts, and the expenses of settlement of the estate, and payment to the legatees under the will of the remainder of the estate, excepting said homestead and furniture, and said 409 shares of stock and $56.64 in cash, which property and money are described in the account as "to be held in trust." On the 20th of May, 1895, said F. B. Rice filed an account of "F. B. Rice, Trustee, Estate of A. E. Rice," in which he charged himself with the trust property shown to have been in his hands upon the settlement of his executor's account of February 8, 1894, and on the 31st of January, 1901, filed a trustee account of said estate in which he charged himself with the Apothecaries' Hall Company stock and other trust property. Both of which accounts were accepted by the court of probate. Archibald E. Rice died March 28, 1893, and Frederick B. Rice and Helen M. Rice are his executors and sole devisees and legatees. Sarah H. Rice, the widow of the testator, Archibald E. Rice, died October, 1906. On the 17th of July, 1906, upon the application of the appellant, Ella S. Williams, Franklin A. Taylor was by the court of probate appointed administrator d. b. n. c. t. a. of the estate of said testator, Archibald E. Rice, and said Taylor thereupon caused a certificate of said 409 shares of stock to be issued to himself, as such administrator, and on the 28th of August, 1907, when ordered by the probate court, upon the application of the appellee Mary B. Mnnson, filed an account in which he charged himself with the 409 shares of Apothecaries' Hall Company stock at $102,250, the homestead at $20,000, and the furniture at $150.
On the 20th of March, 1907, the appellant, Ella S. Williams, made a written application to the court of probate, alleging that said 409 shares of the stock of the Apothecaries' Hall Company belonged to the estate of Archibald E. Rice, that said Taylor was administrator and trustee thereof, that it was necessary to sell said stock to settle said estate, that if sold in a block it was worth $100,000, that such a sale would best promote the interest of the owners thereof and of the estate, and asking for an order for the sale of the same, as one block of stock. This application was denied by the probate court, and said applicant appealed to the superior court. Upon the trial of the appeal in the superior court these facts appeared: At...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Prince v. Sheffield
...Statutes §§ 45-175 and 45-180. Of course any sale would be subject to general fiduciary obligations of fair dealing. Williams v. Taylor, 81 Conn. 90, 95, 70 A. 643; Connor v. Hart, 157 Conn. 265, 274, 253 A.2d 9. But § 45-236 permits the approval of a sale of personal property even though, ......
-
Oles v. Furlong
...his unwillingness to do so; and they might under this statute seek an order of the Probate Court compelling him to act. See Williams v. Taylor, 81 Conn. 90, 70 A. 643. So, an executor may be confronted with the question whether he should sell personal property specifically bequeathed in ord......
- O'Neill v. Kildupf