Seidman's Estate

Citations

• 261 Pa. 540
• 104 A. 799
• 1918 Pa. LEXIS 787

Syllabus

<p>Executors and administrators — Sale of personalty — Sale at undervaluation — Failure to exercise common prudence and caution— Fraud — Appraised value — Surcharge—Findings of auditing judge —Palpable error — Exceptions—Appeals—Assignments of error — - Practice, Supreme Court.</p> <p>1. Findings of an auditing judge can be reviewed only on assignments which show exceptions taken in, and acted upon by, the court below, and then such findings will not be disturbed unless the review demonstrates palpable error.</p> <p>2. Ordinarily, trustees, administrators and like fiduciaries, are not liable beyond what they actually receive, except in cases of fraud or gross carelessness.</p> <p>3. Under certain circumstances, where an-administrator fails to exercise common care, prudence and caution in disposing of decedent’s properly, the auditing judge may surcharge him with what it finds to be the full value thereof on the day of the sale.</p> <p>4. An administrator sold stock in decedent’s carpet and rug store, appraised at $9,895 in bulk, at a public vendue to his brother-in-law for $3,600. The latter entered into a partnership with the administrator’s son-in-law, .and the partnership two months later sold said goods for $10,645. Creditors excepted to the allowance of the difference between the appraised value of the merchandise and the actual amount realized therefrom by the accountant. The court found that on the date of- the public sale, the goods were worth $8,000 and that the administrator had not used common skill, prudence and caution, and surcharged him in the sum of $4,400, the difference between the real value and price realized at the sale. Certain creditors appealed, contending, inter alia, (1) that accountant should be charged with the sum of $10,645, the full amount subsequently received for the goods, (2) that prior to the last sale considerable goods of value had been sold from the stock, (3) that, even if not guilty of fraud, accountant should be held liable