Cunningham v. Cauthen

Citations

• 44 S.C. 95
• 21 S.E. 800
• 1895 S.C. LEXIS 69

Syllabus

<p>1. Case Criticised — Administrator.—The case of Cunningham v. Cauthen, 37 S. C., 123, held to have decided that an administrator who had purchased cotton at an estate sale at gold prices in 1866, was not chargeable with the premium on such gold, it not having been shown that he had converted the purchase money into currency, and such ruling approved.</p> <p>2. Immaterial Error. — There is no reversible error committed by the Circuit Judge in stating the accounts in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court, though such statement was not supported by a finding of fact, made by him, which had been held by the appellate court to be irrelevant.</p> <p>3. Case Criticised— Recommittal — Evidence.—This case having been recommitted to the same referee to correct items in his former statement of the accounts, no new questions being involved, there was no error on the part of the referee in declining to receive further testimony, and the former decision of this court in this case did not authorize additional testimony.</p> <p>4. Ibid. — Administrator's Accounts. — The rule declared in the former decision approved — that where an administrator’s accounts with the estate aDd with the infant distributees (who have no guardian) are stated separately, interest should be charged against him on his estate account and in his favor on his payments for the distributees as of their respective dates, i. e.} at the end of every year, without regard to the balances on the other account.</p> <p>5. Findings op Fact — Immaterial Error. — There is no reversible error in a finding of fact which did not control the judge in settling the accounts.</p> <p>6. Ibid. — Concurrent findings of fact by referee and Circuit Judge sustained.</p> <p>7. Ibid. — Case Criticised. — Findings of the referee and Circuit Judge held not to be incorrect statements of the testimony nor contrary to the former decision in this case, and to be supported by testimony.</p> <p>8. Appeal — A Slight Error in addit