(Download) "In Re Rinios Estate" by Supreme Court of Montana " eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: In Re Rinios Estate
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 14, 1933
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 60 KB
Description
Executors and Administrators ? Special Administrators ? Duties ? When Administrator Incompetent. Executors and Administrators ? Permission to Special Administrator to Carry on Business of Decedent Should be Temporary Only. 1. Though it may have been the part of wisdom to permit a special administrator placed in charge of the estates of two partners who met death simultaneously to continue operation of the partnership business for the purpose of avoiding loss, the arrangement - Page 429 should have been only of a temporary character, it having been the duty of the administrator to take immediate steps to dispose of the property and goodwill of the concern. Same ? When Administrator Incompetent to Serve. 2. The law does not favor the administration of estates by a person under conditions likely to result in a conflict of interests in the performance of his duty, as where he administers the estates of two partners and at the same time carries on the partnership business virtually as a surviving partner, and in the meantime fails to ascertain the rights of the estates in the business or make reports required by statute; in such circumstances he is incompetent to serve, as a legal proposition, under section 10124, Revised Codes of 1921. Same ? Petition for Removal ? Estoppel. 3. Where one of three heirs requested the appointment of a certain person as administrator and later all three petitioned for his removal, contention that the one who made the request was estopped from asking for his removal, if maintainable, left the right of the other two, who did not join in the request, to petition for his removal unaffected. Same ? Neglect of Duty ? Remissness Resulting in Benefit to Estate No Excuse. 4. Diligence and careful attention must be given by administrators to all essential details in the matter of the settlement of estates of deceased persons; and when complaint of neglect by such an officer is made, he may not excuse himself by the assertion that his remissness resulted in benefit to the estate. Same ? Duty to Make Reports Imperative. 5. While mere failure to make reports within the time prescribed by statute is not sufficient cause for removal of an administrator, provided no harm has come to the estate or those interested therein because of the delay, courts should insist upon compliance with the statutes. Same ? Refusal to Remove Administrator of Estates of Partners ? Appeal ? What not Moot Question. 6. Where an heir of one of two partners, who met death simultaneously and whose estates were placed in charge of the same administrator, was unsuccessful in having the latter removed on various grounds, among others, that the partnership affairs had never been liquidated or settled, the fact that the district court, a different judge presiding from the one who refused to remove the administrator, made an order, after perfection of appeal by petitioner, appointing a trustee of the assets of the partnership with direction to cause its books to be audited and to wind up its affairs, did not show that the questions presented by the appeal had become moot, but rather emphasized the necessity of a change in the administratorship.