Watts v. Taylor's Adm'r

Citations

• 80 Va. 627
• 1885 Va. LEXIS 103

Syllabus

<p>1. Personal Representatives — Heirs, <Sfc. — Judgment against the first in suit to which the last were not parties, affects not the last for want of privity; and is not evidence against them in suit to subject the decedent’s real estate ; and Code 1873, ch. 127, $ 3, does not alter the rule. Brewis v. Lawson, 76 Va. 36.</p> <p>2. Idem — Judgment a editor. — Yet, suit against personal representatives jointly with heirs, &c., by creditor of decedent, to collect out of real estate or otherwise, bond debt whereon judgment existed against personal representatives, is maintainable by evidence other than said judgment, though said judgment be set forth in the bill, the heirs, &c., having as full opportunity to defend against the debt as though no judgment existed.</p> <p>3. Idem — Case at bar. — Intestate left lands, slaves and other personalty; also widow and adult children, who divided among themselves the lands and chattels, leaving administrator only certain choses in action wherewith to pay debts. Account of administration, as nearly accurate as lapse of time and meagre evidence allowed, showed him in advance to estate with nothing wherewith to pay judgment obtained against him by decedent’s creditor, who sued, in chancery, administrator and his sureties, and the widow, heirs and distributees, to collect out of decedent’s unaliened lands, or otherwise, the bond debt represented by said judgment.</p> <p>Held :—</p> <p>1. The suit may be maintained against the heirs, &c., to collect the debt out of the unaliened lands, upon evidence other than the judgment.</p> <p>2. Equity will allow resort at once to said lands, instead of going upon the sureties of the administrator.</p>