Curts v. Brooks

Citations

• 71 Ill. 125

Syllabus

<p>1. Administration—appeal from order disapproving a part of administrator's account, does not prevent county court from ordering a, distribution. Where an administrator presents his report to the county court, and some of liis charges against the estate are rejected, and he appeals to the circuit court, this does not deprive the county court of jurisdiction to order a distribution of the money in his hands over and above the rejected items claimed by him.</p> <p>3. Same—effect of judgment on administrator's report. Where the county court approves an administrator’s report or account in part, hut disallows certain charges, the order of approval is a distinct and complete judgment, separate from that rejecting part of his charges, and remains binding upon the administrator and the heirs, notwithstanding an appeal by the former from the order.</p> <p>3. Same—effect of an appeal by administrator from an order disallowing part of his charges in his report. On appeal by an administrator from an order of the county court rejecting a part of his charges for money paid out, the circuit court does not acquire jurisdiction of the whole account ■ or report, but only of the rejected items, and can not hear evidence as to any of the items allowed by the county court. If the heirs appeal as to the items allowed, the rule is different.</p> <p>4. Same—compelling distribution. An administrator has no right to hold moneys of an estate in his hands over and above what are necessary for the payment of debts, and deprive the heirs of its use, and he may be compelled to make a partial distribution within one year from the grant of letters. v</p>