Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

134 Mass. 155

Studley v. Willis

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 19, 1883

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1883-01-19

Contract, upon an account annexed, for the expenses of the funeral of the defendant’s intestate. Writ dated July 19, 1881. Answer: 1. A general denial. 2. That the action was prematurely brought.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1940

2 state decisions

Relies on National Bank of Troy v. Stanton

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1883-01-19

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court.

¶1The provisions of the Gen. Sts. c. 97, § 16, that “no executor or administrator shall be held to answer to the suit of a creditor of the deceased, if commenced within one year after his giving bond for the discharge of his trust, unless it is for the recovery of a demand that would not be affected by the insolvency of the estate, or unless it is brought after the estate has been represented insolvent, for the purpose of ascertaining a contested claim,” are not a bar to this suit, as contended by the defendant. Without considering the other answers to his claim, it is clear that the plaintiff’s debt, being for the expenses of the funeral of the deceased, is within the exception of “ a demand that would not be affected by the insolvency of the estate,” and therefore the prohibition against bringing a suit within a year does not apply to it. Troy National Bank v. Stanton, 116 Mass. 435.

¶2Exceptions overruled.

/134/mass/155 · .json · Public domain