Case ID: ga_96/html/0780-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Lumpkin, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Matthews v. Council, administrator.
    May 13, 1895.
    Brought forward from the last term.
    Action on bond. Before Judge Smith. Montgomery superior court. April term, 1894.
    George N. Matthews sued James Council and five others upon an administrator’s bond, for the recovery of $84.91, with interest and costs. On demurrer for want of a cause of action alleged, the declaration was dismissed, and plaintiff excepted. He alleged, that on July 4, 1892, defendants entered into an administrator’s bond jointly and severally obligating themselves, in the sum of $20,000, that James Council should administer according to laiv upon the estate of David Williams deceased; that the estate which went into the hands of the administrator to be administered was of thp value of $10,000 or other large sum; that Williams at his death was indebted to plaintiff $84.91 upon an account which the administrator failed to pay; that at the July term, 1893, of the justice’s court of the 51st district G. M., plaintiff sued the administrator on said account and obtained judgment for the sum named, besides interest and costs; that the administrator having failed to pay the judgment, an execution was issued against the lauds and tenements, goods and chattels of the deceased, which were in the hands of the administrator to be administered, and the constable of said district made return that there is no property of David Williams in said county upon which to levy the execution; and that by reason of the above recited facts a breach of the bond has been made and established, and defendants have become jointly and severally bound to pay plaintiff’ $84.91, with interest and costs, which sum they refuse to pay.
   Lumpkin, J.

Under the decision of this court in the case of Gibson v. Robinson, 90 Ga. 756, the plaintiff’s declaration in the present case set forth a good cause of action, and it was error to dismiss the same on demurrer. Judgment reversed.

Loud & Clarke, for plaintiff.