Case ID: mich-np-r_1/html/0197-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Higby, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the matter of the claim of William Stevens vs. The Estate of Ebenezer Arnold, deceased.
    
    
      A party appealing from the decision of Commissioners appointed to adjust claims against the estate of a deceased person, must show by his application that he has been injured by the allowance or disallowance of a sum, to the amount of twenty dollars] at least; otherwise liis appeal will be dismissed.
    
      Washtenaw Circuit,
    
      February Term, 1870.
    William Cheever, administrator of the estate of Ebenezer Arnold, deceased, applied for an appeal from the decision of the Commissioners appointed to examine and adjust claims against said estate, in allowing a claim of William Stevens, and in such application alleged the following grounds or reasons for appeal:
    First, “ The Commissioners allowed to said Stevens a sum much larger than the amount equitably due to him from said:' deceased.’’
    Second, “ The said Commissioners did not allow in favor of .the estate of said deceased,xthe amount of credits or offsets which should be allowed.”
    A certified copy of such allowance and appeal being filed in this Court,
    O. Hawkins, of Counsel for the claimant, moved to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the causes alleged in the application were not such as entitled the administrator to appeal under the statute (O. L. Chap. 96, Sec. 22) in that it is not claimed, that the sum allowed to the claimant, and to which the administrator ol ijeeted was of the amount of twenty dollars, or that the sum disallowed as a credit or offset in behalf of the Estate was of the amount of twenty dollars.
    
    L. D. Norris for the administrator, urged in resisting the motion,
    1st, That the statute referred to does not apply to cases of appeal by an administrator, but the cases of appeal by a claimant against an. estate.
    2nd, But if it did apply, the causes for appeal as alleged, were sufficient.
   By the Court,

Higby, J.

The statute applies equally to cases of ajipeal by an executor or administrator, representing the estate, and by a claimant against an estate, as a reference to the two preceeding sections, in connection with section 22, C. L;, clearly shows — the only difference being that if a claimant against an estate appeal, he must give bond with security, to secure the estate against damages and costs. If the appeal is by an executor or administrator, no bond is required.

It is necessary that the party claiming an appeal should state affirmatively in his application, at least one of the causes for which the appeal is allowed: to-wit, that the sum allowed by the commissioners, and objected to by the appellant, amounts to at least twenty dollars; or, that the sum claimed by the appellant, and disallowed by the commissioners was of the amount of at least twenty dollars.

As the application for the appeal in this case fails to state either, the motion to dismiss must be granted with costs.