In re Estate of Taylor
This text of 52 Cal. 477 (In re Estate of Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
An executor is not responsible for the loss of property so long as he acts in good faith and with ordinary discretion.
A case must be proved of clear neglect of duty in order to charge him with the loss. ( Wébb v. Bellinger, 2 Desaus. Eq. 507; William v. Maitland, 1 Ired. Eq. 92; Thomas v. White et al. 8 Litt. 184-5; Schultz v. Pulver, 11 Wend. 367-374; Rowan v. Nirhpatrich, 14 111. 12-13; Whitted et al. v. Webb et al. 2 Dev. & B. Eq. 447; Next et al. v. Pouher, 1 Strob. Eq. 170; Boggs v. Adger, 4 Rich. Eq. 412; Neff’s Appeal, 57 Pa. St. 95.)
Burch & Griffiths, for the Respondents.
The appellants, executors of Taylor, were not, under the circumstances here appearing, justly chargeable with the three hundred and ninety-four dollars lost through the death and insolvency of Michaels in New York.
Cause remanded, with directions to modify the orders accordingly. Remittitur forthwith.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
52 Cal. 477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-taylor-cal-1877.