Armitage's Estate

46 A. 117, 195 Pa. 582, 1900 Pa. LEXIS 689
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 30, 1900·No. Appeal, No. 86·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The reasons given by the auditor in his report for dismissing the exceptions to the accounts filed, are so entirely satisfactory that we sustain them as they are there expressed. There is no doubt whatever that all the parties interested agreed in writing to all the payments of principal, to the removal of the securities, to the investments which were made by G. Barton Armitage, and to the receipt by Simpson as administrator c. t. a. of those that were left. These parties were all competent to make the agreements referred to, and as the principal of the estate had been encroached upon and used for their own, and their mother’s support, it was eminently right and proper to do just as they [589] did in the execution of the papers in question. The assignments of error are dismissed.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the cost of the appellant.

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

Armitage's Estate, 46 A. 117, 195 Pa. 582, 1900 Pa. LEXIS 689 (Pa. 1900).

46 A. 117 (Armitage's Estate) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ward Estate
38 A.2d 50 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1944)
Strawbridge's Estate
185 A. 726 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1936)
Stephen's Estate
181 A. 559 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1935)
MacFarlane's Estate
177 A. 12 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1935)
Detre's Estate
117 A. 54 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1922)