Case ID: nc_36/html/0124-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Gaston, Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

DAVID MOFFIT vs. HUGH MOFFITT’S Adm’rs.
    An administrator is entitled to call upon the personal representatives of a deceased co-administrator, where itappears there has been no settlement between them, for an account of their joint administration, and for his proper share of the commissions received by such co-administrator.
    This bill was filed leturnable to Fall Term, 1838, of Randolph Court of Equity, and at that term the answers of the defendants were filed, replication thereto taken, and commissions to take depositions ordered. At Spring Term, 1840, the cause was set for hearing and transmitted to this Court by consent. The facts of the case appear in the opinion of the Court.
    The cause was argued by Mendenhall for the defendants.
    No counsel appeared for the plaintiff.
   Gaston, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the Court. Upon the pleadings it appears that the plaintiff and the intestate of the defendants, in the year 1835, made a final settlement, as administrators of William Wilkinson, deceased, with the next of kin of the said William, in which settlement they were allowed to retain a considerable sum for their commissions. The plaintiff charges that the whole of these commissions came to the hands of the intestate of the defendants, who died without accounting therefor to the plaintiffs; and also that the said intestate, upon that settlement, and for the purpose of completing it, applied to his benefit the sum of $68, which were the proper moneys of the plaintiff. The defendants deny that their intestate received more of the commissions than he was entitled to, or used the moneys of the plaintiff as charged; and further insist that, if he did, there was a settlement afterwards between the parties of all matters growing out of this joint administration. The proofs are full that, up to September, 1837, which was but a short time before the death of the intestate of the defendants, the said intestate distinctly admitted that he and the plaintiff had not come to an account with each other in relation to their said joint administration, and that they were to have a settlement thereof. The plaintiff therefore is entitled to the account which he prays for. The commissioner will enquire what was the ratable proportion of the commissions to which the plaintiff was entitled, and by whom the said commissions were received; and also examine the respective demands of the parties against each other, connected with their joint administration, and take an account accordingly.

Per Curiam. Decree accordingly.