Case ID: me_32/html/0159-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Shepley, C. J., Tenney, J., and Howard, J., per Shepley, C. J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Emerson, Appellant from a decree of the Judge of Probate.
    
    Of the compensation to be made to guardians fox their services.
    The appellant is guardian to a minor. In a guardianship account he presented the following claim : —
    
      
      “ 1847, Sept. 28th. To my own services and responsibility in the charge committed to me of the real estate of my ward, its careful and prudent management, and overseeing repairs and improvements for thee years next preceding this date, in addition to. usual commissions on personal assets, at §500, per year, §1500.”
    The Judge of Probate disallowed the claim. From that adjudication this appeal is taken.
    
      A. W. Paine, for appellant.
   Court.

Shepley, C. J., Tenney, J., and Howard, J., per Shepley, C. J.,

orally.—It was said in the argument that the Judge of Probate disallowed the charge, because he supposed the statute had fixed the highest rate of compensation. We think there is no such limitaton as to preclude an allowance of the character claimed in this case.

The guardian may have compensation for services ; and it may be much beyond the amount of commissions. A rule different from that would tend to prevent faithfulness and care.

In this case, the amount charged is large. Most estates would soon disappear under such allowances. No specifications are furnished us. Without further information as to the items, we think so large a claim cannot be allowed.

Decree affirmed.