Grant v. . Pride

16 N.C. 269

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: December 5, 1828
• Status: Published

Opinion

Hall Judge

— The office of executor or administra tor does not per se draw commissiansaftei- it as a mat ter of course.' They are allowed for services rendered in liquidating; and settling estates. Therefore if one ex- , ' , ' , ecutor performs more labor, and renders more service {ftan another, he is entitled to a greater share of com-misssions.

In the present, case, it appears that the Defendant rendered all necessary services in adjusting and settling the estate of the testator; that the Plaintiff did attend at some few public meetings ; but the amount of service rendered by him has not been made to appear. He lived at a considerable distance j the Defendant lived very near the estate, kept all the papers, transacted the business with all concerned, and finally settled it, and held on upon the commissions.

It is unnecessary to refer the case to the master, because it is confin'ed to a narrow compass. I am author-ised to say, that a decree may be entered for one-sixth part of the commissions allowed to the Defendant, and that each party pay their own costs.

Per Curiam.-

—Let a decree be entered accordingly,.