Unterrainer v. Seelig

Citations

• 13 S.D. 148
• 82 N.W. 394
• 1900 S.D. LEXIS 106

Syllabus

<p>1. Where the common law relating to arbitration was in force, and a claim ag-ainst an estate was submitted to arbitration by agreement, n.nd it was stipulated that judgment should be rendered in the circuit court on the award made, such stipulation did not invalidate the submission, but may be treated as surplussng-e, and the award was valid.</p> <p>2. An objection to the introduction in evidence of the submission of a claim ag-ainst an estate to arbitration, and the award thereon, because the administrator was not authorized by the probate court to submit to an award, was improperly sustained, since such administrator had the right at common law to submit to arbitration any controversy between himself and creditors of the estate, and such right was not excluded by Comp Laws, $ 5805, providing for a reference of claims against estates on agreement in writing', to be approved by the judge of the county court.</p> <p>3, Where an award of arbitrators on a claim against an estate appointed by agreement of the claimant and the administrator, slated clearly the amount determined to be due on such claim, simb award was not invalidated, as to such matters properly submitted. !),> the inclusion therein of matters not submitted, since1 such portion of the award may be rejected.</p>