Case ID: ky-op_2/html/0306-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Judge Williams:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

J. T. Robinson et al v. L. R. Steele et al.
    Appearance — Exceptions to Commissioner’s Report Regarded as Sufficient— Service.
    , ■ The filing of exceptions to a master commissioner’s report, by an administrator, who had not been served with process to the suit is held to be a sufficient appearance.
    APPEAL PROM GALLITJN CIRCUIT COURT.
    June 17, 1868.
   Opinion op ti-ie Court by

Judge Williams:

Robinson being administrator de bonis non, with tbe will, an nexed, of Upton Steele, and having received assets from the executors who first undertook the execution of the will, and having failed to pay the bequests to the minor plaintiff, Letitia Steele, who sues by her guardian, and her brother, W. B. Steele, they brought suit for a settlement and for judgment for the amount coming to them.

After the answer of the administrator was filed, A. Gibson’s children, by petition, were made parties and'asserted claim and asked judgment for the legacy due them; to this the administrator made no response and had no service of process.

The cause, however, was referred to a commissioner for proof and to state the accounts of the administrator and these claimants, and he reported the amount due each respectively.

To this report the administrator took various exceptions, not only to the allowance to the Steeles, but also to the Gibsons, and this must be regarded as an appearance to the latter’s suit, even if the proceedings in their behalf had been irregular.

The court overruled his exceptions, and he asks a correction of the judgment.

After regarding all the exceptions, we find but the following errors:

The assets to be distributed are set- down by the .commissioner at.........................$18,451.07
One-fifth of which is ...................... 3,690.21-
Whilst he reports it at ..................... 3,879.17

Winslow, for appellants.

This evidently being a mistake of calculation, and perhaps might be regarded a misprision, but for an exception to it, and which is also overruled; when this is corrected,

the amount due W. B. Steele is................$344.70
instead of the adjudged amount of ............. 439.18
there is due the minor L. Steele................ 495.10
instead of the adjudged amount of.............. 589.59
And there is due the Gribsons.................. 408.72
instead of the sum adjudged................... 597.68

Bor these errors, the judgment is reversed, with directions to the court below to correct them.