Anthony v. Negley

2 Ind. 211
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 22, 1850
StatusPublished

This text of 2 Ind. 211 (Anthony v. Negley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Anthony v. Negley, 2 Ind. 211 (Ind. 1850).

Opinion

Jdlackeord, J.

This was a bill in chancery, filed by William Anthony, administrator of the estate of Jonathan Anthony, deceased. Jonathan A.nthony was the sole heir of James Anthony, deceased. Catharine Anthony and Elisha King, administered on the estate of James Anthony; David Negley, Jesse McCallister, and one Robert Armstrong were the sureties of said administrators. Catharine Anthony and Robert Armstrong are dead. The bill prays for an account of the administration, &c.

This suit is against said King, administrator, said Negley and McCallister, sureties as aforesaid, and the unknown heirs of said Catharine Anthony, administratrix, and the unknown heirs of said Robert Armstrong.

The bill alleges, among other things, that said Catharine Anthony, administratrix as aforesaid, received a large amount of the assets of the estate, and wasted and converted the same to her own use.

Negley and McCallister, two of said sureties, demurred [212]*212generally to the bill; the demurrer was sustained, and the bill dismissed.

J. G. Jones, for the plaintiff. J. Pitcher, for the defendants.

We think the demurrer in this case ought not to have been sustained. It has been decided, at the present term, that if an administrator commits waste, his sureties are liable, under the statute of 1843, to be sued in chancery by the person interested. Persons et al. v. Crane

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Ind. 211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anthony-v-negley-ind-1850.