¶1The allegation of full payment, in the defendants’ plea in bar, was the only point that was sufficient (if true) to bar the action; and that being traversed by the plaintiffs, and the traverse not joined by the defendants, judgment ought to have been for the plaintiffs. An administrator, by the laws of this state, cannot discharge himself by pleading, that he has fully administered; for if the estate is insufficient to pay all the debts, he must represent it insolvent, and pay to each creditor his ratable part of the avails; unless any creditor shall be foreclosed, by neglecting to exhibit his claims, on due notice being given, agreeable to the statutes in such case provided; which is not alleged in this case.
1 Kirby 246
Olcott v. Graham
Decided March 15, 1787
Connecticut Superior Court · decided 1787-03-15
EbeoR from tbe Court of Common Pleas. Olcott and Caldwell-brought their action, in capacity of administrators, against tbe defendants, in tbe same capacity, on a note, given by their intestate, to tbe plaintiffs’ intestate.— Tbe defendants pleaded, 1. Full payment by tbe original promisor, to tbe original promisee. 2. Plene adnnnistravenmt.
Judgment of the common pleas reversed · Decided 1787-03-15