Mansfield v. Patterson

Decided May 15, 1819

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1819-05-15

The action was assumpsit upon a promissory note made by William Patterson, the defendant’s intestate. The defendant pleads the insolvency of her intestate’s estate, and avers that the plaintiff filed his claim with the commissioners of insolvency, that the same was allowed, that she has always been ready to pay him his dividend, and that she has, in all things touching the said administration, conformed to the directions of the law, and has fully administered the estate.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 1944

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1819-05-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Curia.

¶1The plaintiff cannot support his action, having filed his claim, and received his distributive share. The statute gives an action only in favor of those who do not file their claim, and discover estate not inventoried or accounted for.

¶2The remedy, in cases like the present, is on the administration bond. If an administrator has notice of such fraudulent conveyance, and does not proceed to sell the estate as belonging to his intestate, this will be unfaithful administration.

¶3Judgment must therefore be entered for the defendant, notwith standing the issue is found for the plaintiff. (1) (a)

¶4Kinsman for the plaintiff.

¶5Davies for the defendant.

¶6Vide, ante, 148, Wildridge vs. Patterson, Admx.; and 264, Paine, J., vs. Nichols, Adm. (a) Vide Johnson & Al. vs. Libbey & Al. ante, 140.