Russell v. Hubbard
Citations
- 59 Ill. 335
Syllabus
<p>1. Administration of estates—recovery can not exceed the account filed. Where a party presents an account against an estate, he is limited in his recovery by the amount claimed, as much as a plaintiff is by the ad damnum in his declaration.</p> <p>2. Same—of costs against an estate. Estates are not answerable for costs on claims filed after the term of the probate court appointed by the admi,.istrator for adjustment.</p> <p>3. Same—of costs against an administrator personally. An administrator can never be made personally liable for costs except upon proof of mala fides or gross negligence on his part.</p> <p>4. Same—effect of the two years’ limitation—of the judgment. Where a claim against an estate was not filed until after the expiration of two j'ears from the granting of letters, the judgment therefor can only be paid out of subsequently discovered assets, and which had not been inventoried and accounted for; and in that regard, the judgment should be special, and not general.</p> <p>5. Remittitub—w7ien and 7mo to be made. A remittitur written in a bill of exceptions after the term at which the judgment was rendered, and in vacation, will not operate to cure an error in the judgment in respect to the matter attempted to be remitted. The remission, to have that effect, should be made during the term off the court, and while the judgment is under its control.</p> <p>6. License to use a wall in building—whether revocable. Where the owner of a lot of ground contemplated the erection of a frame building thereon, the owner of a brick house situated on the line of an adjacent lot proposed to him that if he would build of brick he might use the brick wall of the house for the purpose of attaching thereto the proposed new building. The proposition was accepted, and the new house was built of brick and attached to the wall of the other building, as suggested: Held, that while the license to use and attach to the wall might have been revoked prior to the execution of th
Judges: Thornton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
18 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Pufahl v. Estate of ParksSupreme Court· 1936-12-07· cited 114×
- Maxwell v. Bay City Bridge Co.Michigan Supreme Court· 1879-10-08· cited 48×
- Metcalf v. HartWyoming Supreme Court· 1891-10-26· cited 31×
- St. Louis National Stock Yards v. Wiggins Ferry Co.Illinois Supreme Court· 1884-09-27· cited 22×
- Forbes v. BalenseiferIllinois Supreme Court· 1874-09-15· cited 21×
- Kamphouse v. GaffnerIllinois Supreme Court· 1874-09-15· cited 20×
- Tanner v. VolentineIllinois Supreme Court· 1874-09-15· cited 16×
- Keck v. ScharfAppellate Court of Illinois· 1980-01-23· cited 14×
- Pingree v. JonesIllinois Supreme Court· 1875-09-15· cited 14×
- Sands v. WacaserIllinois Supreme Court· 1894-04-02· cited 7×
- Bocock v. LeetAppellate Court of Illinois· 1917-04-19· cited 6×
- Simpson v. WrightAppellate Court of Illinois· 1886-05-21· cited 5×
- Murray v. GibsonAppellate Court of Illinois· 1886-12-11· cited 3×
- Title Guarantee & Trust Co. v. New York Juvenile AsylumAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1909-07-13· cited 1×
- Hall v. Estate of HaleIllinois Supreme Court· 1903-04-24· cited 1×
- Frank's Service Center, Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co. (In re Wolff)N.D. Illinois· 1984-03-01· cited 1×
- Richardson v. AllmanAppellate Court of Illinois· 1891-09-11
- Greenwood Lake & Port Jervis Railroad v. New York & Greenwood Lake RailroadNew York Court of Appeals· 1891-10-01
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Other cases named Russell v. Hubbard
4 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.