Case ID: or_131/html/0507-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ROSSMAN, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued at Pendleton, October 29;
    affirmed December 17, 1929;
    rehearing denied January 7, 1930
    ALBERT T. DAISLEY, Administrator, v. S. E. HAMBELTON et al.
    (282 Pac. 1086)
    
      For appellant there was a brief and oral argument by Mr. George W. Cherry.
    
    For respondent there was a brief and oral argument by Mr. J. A. Burleigh.
    
   ROSSMAN, J.

We believe that the opening paragraph of the decision in Malagamba, v. McLean, 89 Or. 807 (173 P. 1175), is sufficient to determine this suit adversely to the plaintiff; we quote:

“This suit is based upon the theory that the real property of an estate is not subject to execution upon a judgment against the heir, until after final distribution of the estate; but such a conclusion is clearly erroneous.”

If any further authorities are required to warrant an affirmance of the result below the following ought to suffice: Freeman on Executions (3ded.), §183; 17 R. C. L., Levy and Seizure, § 64, p. 164; 18 C. J., Descent and Distribution, § 333; 23 C. J., Executions, § 66. The decree of the lower court is affirmed.

Affirmed. Rehearing Denied.