Prior v. Talbot

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Prior v. Talbot

64 Mass. 1

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedSeptember 15, 1852

StatusPublished

This text of 64 Mass. 1 (Prior v. Talbot) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Prior v. Talbot, 64 Mass. 1 (Mass. 1852).

Pincite

Opinion

Shaw, C. J.

The appellant was appointed executor of his father’s will, and was directed to set apart a certain part of the estate, it first being converted into money, to appropriate the income to the widow for life, and then distribute the principal. [3]*3This imposed a duty upon the executor, to retain the principal and invest it; and he must stand responsible until he has discharged himself of this implied trust. His duty is to administer the estate according to the will, and such is the condition of his bond. Here he was appointed executor and trustee. If for greater convenience he wishes to close his account as executor, and open a new account as trustee, he must give bond in the capacity of trustee, and charge himself in one capacity, eo instcmti, and by the same act by which he claims his discharge in the other. Dorr v. Wainwright, 13 Pick. 328, and the cases there cited.

The appellant having received the property as executor, and having never qualified as trustee, is bound to account in his character of executor.

Decree of probate cowrt affirmed.

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

Shaw, C. J.

The appellant was appointed executor of his father’s will, and was directed to set apart a certain part of the estate, it first being converted into money, to appropriate the income to the widow for life, and then distribute the principal. [3]*3This imposed a duty upon the executor, to retain the principal and invest it; and he must stand responsible until he has discharged himself of this implied trust. His duty is to administer the estate according to the will, and such is the condition of his bond. Here he was appointed executor and trustee. If for greater convenience he wishes to close his account as executor, and open a new account as trustee, he must give bond in the capacity of trustee, and charge himself in one capacity, eo instcmti, and by the same act by which he claims his discharge in the other. Dorr v. Wainwright, 13 Pick. 328, and the cases there cited.

The appellant having received the property as executor, and having never qualified as trustee, is bound to account in his character of executor.

Decree of probate cowrt affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 Mass. 1, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prior-v-talbot-mass-1852.