ADMINISTRATORS AND EXECUTORS.
1. On the death, pending a suit, of one of two joint ad-
ministrators sued for a devastavit, a suggestion of the
death may be made of record, and the action may pro-
ceed against the survivor, Castor vs. Pace,
2. Letters of administration on the estate of the deceas-
ed wife of a surviving husband, claiming property
through her, are inadmissible, until property is proven
in the wife. Morgan vs. Jones, et ux.,
3. A Court House, with most of the records, was con-
sumed by fire. The records left showed, among other
things, an order authorizing S., as administrator of B.,
to sell a lot of land; the returns of S., as administrator
of B.; and an order dismissing S. from the administra-
tion of the estate of B.
Held, That these things were sufficient to prove S. to
have been appointed the administrator of the estate
of B. Bush vs. Lindsey,
4. A fraud practiced by an executor, in the sale of his
testator's effects, is a good defence to an action on a
note given for the article in the sale of which the fraud
was practiced Williamson et al. vs. Walker et al.,
5. It is a general and well settled doctrine, recognized
both in England and America, that no suit can be main-
tained or brought by any executor or administrator, in
his official capacity, in the Courts of any other coun-
try, except that from which he derives his authority.
To authorize a foreign administratrix to sue in this State,
under the Act of 1850, (Cobb 341,) the intestate must
have departed this life out of this State. So. Western
Railroad vs. Paulk,
6. If a father create a trust in favor of his daughter,
which is irrevocable, and die, the title having passed
out of the father in his lifetime, it cannot be enforced by
his legal representative. Burney adm'r vs. Ball,
7. The failure of an executor or guardian to make re-
turns is an omission of duty, and therefore a breach of
trust, and throws on him the burden of proving to the
satisfaction of the Court and jury that he has discharg-
ed the duty of his trust with fidelity. Wellborn vs.
Rogers and wife,
8. A receipt by a legatee to the executor, who became
such by intermarriage with her mother, the executrix,
and with whom the legatee lived during her minority,
after her majority, to the time of the giving of the re-
ceipt, having great confidence in him, and entrusting
him with her property, is no bar to an examination in-
to the accounts prior to the receipt. Id.
See Copartners 3. Injunction 1.
See Equity, Pleading and Practice, 3, 14, 15.
1. No appeal lies from a rule absolute awarded by the
Court, for the foreclosure of a mortgage. Clifton vs.
Livor et al.,
2. The plaintiff has, in a proper case, the right to enter
up judgment, nunc pro tunc, against the surety on ap-
peal. Mayo vs. Kersey,
3. A main issue in the trial of which the merits of the
principal cause depends, is not a collateral issue, and
the party cast is entitled to an appeal on complying
with the terms imposed by the statute. Muson and
Dickinson vs. Croom,
4. If a defendant appeals from a verdict rendered against
him and gives security, the defendant is bound for the
whole and every part of the judgment which may be
recovered on the appeal, while the security is bound for
that part only which his principal cannot or does not
pay. Brown vs. Ayer & Bates.
5. If the plaintiff receive of the defendant one-half of
the amount of the judgment in full of his part thereof,
it is a receipt in full of the entire judgment, as the en-
tire judgment is the part of the defendant. Id.
6. Complainants in a bill of interpleader may appeal, if
their individual rights are affected by the decree; and
that one of the parties called on by said bill to litigate
their rights does not appeal, does not impair or destroy
the right of appeal of the complainants in the bill of
interpleader. Cooper et al. vs. Jones et al.,
See Illegal Contracts, 1, 2.
When causes are referred to an arbitrator who is to pass
upon questions of law and fact, and also all the equities
involved, with the right of any party interested to ap-
appeal therefrom to the Supreme Court on any ques-
tion of law or equity passed upon and decided, the
Court will not reverse the judgment of the Court ma-
king the award its judgment, if the law and equity up-
on the facts as found by the arbitrator are correctly ad-
ministered. Greene adm'r et al. vs. Ross and wife et al. 613
1. An attorney at law has no authority as such to receive
in payment of, or as collateral security for a debt pla-
ced in his hands for collection, notes on third persons.
The client may ratify the act, or the authority may be
proven by the usual course of dealings between the
attorney and client. Jeter & Forbes vs. Haviland, Reese
& Co.,
2. An attorney at law, who is called on to write a bill of
sale for a negro, is not prohibited by the statute from
giving evidence of a conversation between the parties
in relation to the contract. Corbet vs. Gilbert,
See Evidence, 16. Illegal Contracts, 2. Continuance, 4.
1. The Superior Courts in this State have the same pow-
er, in relation to bail in criminal cases, as the Courts of
King's Bench in England. Corbett vs. The State.
2. The Court of King's Bench in England, and the Su-
perior Courts in this State, have the power to grant bail
in all bailable cases, until the accused is in execution.
Id.
1. When the capital stock of an incorporated bank is
subscribed and paid in, it constitutes a trust fund for
the benefit of the stockholders; but when notes are is-
sued and circulated thereon, another and superior trust
arises and the stock must be first applied to the pay-
ment of the notes of the bank. Schley et. al. vs. Dix-
on et al.,
2. "If the charter require a certain amount of the capi-
tal stock to be paid in before notes can be issued, but
the directors nevertheless proceed to issue notes, if the
the bank fail or become insolvent, the billholders and
creditors of the bank may proceed at once against the
stockholders and directors. Id.
3. If stockholders do an illegal act, or omit to do what
the law requires, by which the rights of others are pre-
· judiced, the law declares such conduct fraudulent Id.
4. The assignees and successors of stockholders and
directors of a bank, are not bound by the fraud of their
assignors and predecessors, if they become assignees
and successors without fraud. Id.
5. Charges in a bill that a small sum was paid in money
for bank stock, and the balance paid in notes for stock
notes, and that the purchasers became President and
directors and reported to the Governor that one-fourth
of the capital stock was paid in, when the report was
known to be untrue, require an answer and explana
tion. The charges uncontradicted warrant the strong-
est conclusions against the parties. Id.
|