Kenyon v. Pierce

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Kenyon v. Pierce

36 A. 1132, 19 R.I. 474, 1896 R.I. LEXIS 100

Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided May 16, 1896·No. Exceptions, c., No. 1877.·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The motion to take off the entry of discontinuance is denied. The mover is not a party to the suit, and, if the entry were taken off, could not be permitted to intervene in the suit and to prosecute the petition contrary *475 to the wishes of the defendant. Cross, Petitioner, 17 R. I. 568. If he deems that his interests as a creditor of the estate have been pre jit diced by the discontinuance of the petition and settlement of the suit made by the administrator, he can contest the allowance of the administrator’s account in the Court of .Probate.

Charles J. Arms, for motion. S. W. K. Allen & W. F. Angelí, contra.

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

Per Curiam.

The motion to take off the entry of discontinuance is denied. The mover is not a party to the suit, and, if the entry were taken off, could not be permitted to intervene in the suit and to prosecute the petition contrary *475 to the wishes of the defendant. Cross, Petitioner, 17 R. I. 568. If he deems that his interests as a creditor of the estate have been pre jit diced by the discontinuance of the petition and settlement of the suit made by the administrator, he can contest the allowance of the administrator’s account in the Court of .Probate.

Charles J. Arms, for motion. S. W. K. Allen & W. F. Angelí, contra.

Kenyon v. Pierce, 36 A. 1132, 19 R.I. 474, 1896 R.I. LEXIS 100 (R.I. 1896).

Pincite

36 A. 1132 (Kenyon v. Pierce) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.