Case ID: ohio-law-abs_8/html/0311-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      HUGHES, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SMITH Exrx etc v STEVENSON Admr etc
    Ohio Appeals, 3rd Dist, Hardin Co
    No 222.
    Decided March 25, 1930
    Stickle & Cessna, Kenton, for Smith.
    John H. Smick, Kenton, for Stevenson.
   HUGHES, J.

By the terms of his will, it is made very clear that this expense was to be made a charge against his estate, and we entertain no doubt but that she is entitled to at least a judgment against his administrator requiring the allowance of this claim as a valid one against his estate.

The manner in which this claim will be paid and the property out of which the same shall be realized, is a matter to be worked out in the probate court by the administrator of his estate.

For these reasons, the demurrer should be overruled.

Before Judgese Hughes, Justice and Crow.