Johnston's Estate

71 A. 1053, 222 Pa. 514, 1909 Pa. LEXIS 903
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJanuary 4, 1909
DocketAppeal, No. 23
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 71 A. 1053 (Johnston's Estate) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Johnston's Estate, 71 A. 1053, 222 Pa. 514, 1909 Pa. LEXIS 903 (Pa. 1909).

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Brown,

This appeal is from the action of the court below in disposing of ten exceptions to the account of John B. Taylor, administrator of the estate of S. A. Johnston, -deceased. By these exceptions the appellant sought to surcharge the accountant on certain items with which he had charged himself at their appraisement in the inventory; to have credits disallowed for depreciation in the appraised value of other items; to have him charged with more interest than he charged himself with, and to reduce his commissions and the fee charged by his attorney. Five of these exceptions, among them being those relating to the commissions of the accountant and .the attorney fee, were dismissed, and the remaining sustained, resulting in a decree surcharging the accountant with $10,907.05. Our examination of the record has satisfied us that all of the exceptions were properly disposed of and that the decree made was proper, but our reasons for reaching this conclusion would be out of place, as the decree has not been assigned as error. If it is correct, as it must be assumed to be in the absence of an assignment that it is error, the reasons given by the learned judge in arriving at it are unimportant and ours for sustaining it are equally so: Fullerton’s Estate, 146 Pa. 61. The dismissal of no one of the exceptions to the account is 'assigned as error. If any one of them was erroneously dismissed, it ought to appear in its exact words in the assignment of error to its dismissal: Wright’s Estate, 155 Pa. 64. No such assignment is before us.

Appeal dismissed at appellant’s costs.

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

Related

Scull's Estate
94 A. 476 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1915)
Daly's Estate
55 Pa. Super. 488 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1913)
Heil v. South Easton Water Co.
49 Pa. Super. 384 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1912)
Condron v. Pennsylvania Railroad
82 A. 64 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)
Standard Soap & Oil Co. v. Printz Degreasing Co.
81 A. 129 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)
Yerger v. Hunn
80 A. 527 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)
Seltzer v. Boyer
73 A. 438 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1909)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
71 A. 1053, 222 Pa. 514, 1909 Pa. LEXIS 903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnstons-estate-pa-1909.