Cherry's Estate

Philadelphia County Orphans' Court

Cherry's Estate

29 Pa. D. & C. 378, 1937 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 285

CourtPennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County

DecidedApril 30, 1937

Docketno. 237 of 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Pa. D. & C. 378 (Cherry's Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cherry's Estate, 29 Pa. D. & C. 378, 1937 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 285 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Klein, J.,

We are all of opinion that the learned hearing judge properly dismissed the appeal from the assessment of inheritance tax. Little need be added to the scholarly opinion, which fully disposes of the single question raised by the exceptions.

The widow, who was one of the executors, has throughout the administration of this estate elected to consider herself a legatee rather than a creditor. This may be because there is serious doubt whether she can claim as a creditor under the language of the antenuptial agreement. But regardless of her reasons, she herself has fixed her status. Her failure to claim as creditor at the audit and to take exceptions to Judge Bok’s adjudication, in which this fund, at her own request, was awarded as a legacy, definitely bars her from raising this question now. The matter is closed. It is res judicata.

The exceptions are therefore dismissed and the opinion is confirmed absolutely.

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

Klein, J.,

We are all of opinion that the learned hearing judge properly dismissed the appeal from the assessment of inheritance tax. Little need be added to the scholarly opinion, which fully disposes of the single question raised by the exceptions.

The widow, who was one of the executors, has throughout the administration of this estate elected to consider herself a legatee rather than a creditor. This may be because there is serious doubt whether she can claim as a creditor under the language of the antenuptial agreement. But regardless of her reasons, she herself has fixed her status. Her failure to claim as creditor at the audit and to take exceptions to Judge Bok’s adjudication, in which this fund, at her own request, was awarded as a legacy, definitely bars her from raising this question now. The matter is closed. It is res judicata.

The exceptions are therefore dismissed and the opinion is confirmed absolutely.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Pa. D. & C. 378, 1937 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cherrys-estate-paorphctphilad-1937.