Glover v. Patten

Citations

• 165 U.S. 394
• 17 S. Ct. 411
• 41 L. Ed. 760
• 1897 U.S. LEXIS 1984

Syllabus

<p>An infant may affirm a contract or settlement made for her benefit, like the one here.in controversy, and may she upon it as if she were originally a party to it.</p> <p>In a suit by children to establish their rights as creditors of the estate of their deceased-mother other creditors are not necessary parties, as the executors or administrators represent them and guard their interests.</p> <p>The -bill in this case, filed by direction of the orphans’ court to obtain the advice of a court of chancery upon the rights of the respective parties, discloses on its face a good cause of action in equity.</p> <p>That cause of action is not barred by the Maryland statute of limitations, still in force in the District of Columbia.</p> <p>Where a pareht, being a debtor to his child, makes an advancement, to the child, it is presumed to be a satisfaction pro tanto of the debt.</p> <p>In a suit between devisees under a will, statements made by-the deceased to counsel respecting the execution of the will, orother similar document, are not privileged.</p> <p>The objection that the complainants were incompetent to'testify as to their mother’s statements, and- as to transactions in. which she took part is entitled to.some weight and is not free from doubt; but such testimony is not indispensable'to the maintenance of the complainants’ bill.</p> <p>The general bequest to her daughters in the mother’s will was not an ex-tinguishment of her debt to them.</p> <p>No'interest should be allowed prior to the mother’s death.</p>