Case ID: ohio-ch_1/html/0594-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Lane, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOHNSON v. JOHNSON’S ADMINISTRATORS.
    Tower to receive money — revoked by death — administrators—payment without authority — * setoff.
    A power to receive money and pay it over for another, is revoked by the death of the party to whom it is given — it does not pass to his administrators.
    If the administrators in such case collect, the amount is money of the party in their hands; and if they have paid it out without authority, it is no defence at law, although paid in the ' way the intestate was to have paid it. If by the payment, the administrators acquired a right to recover against the plaintiff, they should have relied upon the setoff, notthe general issue.
    Assumpsit for money had and received. The general issue joined. It appeared in evidence that sundry promissory notes were placed in the hands of the intestate to receive the amount and pay it out to others, and that after his death the administrators had collected the money, and paid it out accordingly.
    
      Van Matre, for the plaintiff,
    claimed to recover the amount received, notwithstanding it had been applied according to the agreement, because there is no matter of setoff, and the defence is not admissible under the general issue.
    
      Fox j contra.
   Lane, J.

The intestate received the notes to collect the amount and pay over to others, but before this was done he died. The authority to collect, became inoperative by the death of the person receiving it. The right to act under the power did not pass to his administrator. As the case is without any evidence of interest in the intestate, and as the defendants acting as his administrators, have received the money of the plaintiff, and have paid it out to others without authority, the payment is a nullity, and does not discharge their liability. If by such payment, the defendants have acquired a right of the plaintiff, upon which they might sue, that is a proper subject of setoff, not of defence, under the general issue. The law arising on the case, as it stands, is with the plaintiff.

Judgment for the plaintiff.