The Hocking sentinel. [volume] (Logan, Ohio) 1871-1906, 1889-02-28
CULVERsIN COURT.
In a Peculiar Case Growing Out Ct
the Settlement Of an Estate in
Hooking County.
Columbus Journal.

LOGAN, o.. Feb. 24.-Pro-
bate Judge w II. Ackers has
just made a decision in a suit
growing out Of the settlement
of the estate Of DR.. Reuben
Culver, decd, one of the
pioneers Of Logan. DR.. Cul-
yer died in 1861. During
his lifetime he made a will,
naming as executors his wife,
Hannah d., and two of his
sons, L. A. and L. H. Culver.
There were four heirs-C. ",
L. A., L. II. and Mary Z.
Culver, the latter having
married a MIR. Webb, In the
settlement of the estate the
executors divided the labor,
L. H. Culverundertaking the
settlement of the personal
property and L, A. Culver
the real estate.
In 1866 the heirs met to
make a : settlement Of their
affairs. L. A. Culver with
drew as one of the trustees
of the estate and also with
drew his distributive share.
At the time Of this settle
ment there was a large
amount Of real estate still un-
sold which was intrusted to
L. A. Culver. In time he
sold the lands, paying the
money, as it is said, to the
heirs, but making no settle
ment with the Probate court.
Since 1866 L. H. Culver
and his sister. Mrs. Webb,
have died, leaving heirs.
Some time ago these heirs
came into court and de-
manded' that the surviving
executor, L. A. Culver, be
cited to appear and make a
final settlement. When this
was done Lizzie Webb and
other legatees filed their ex-
ception- to said account.
The court in it's decision,
after submitting the will,
said:
''It is claimed by the sur
viving executor that on
November 8, 1866, a settle
ment was made by and be-
tween the heirs, whereby L.
A. Culver, one of the execu-
tors, withdrew from the trust;
also withdrew his distribu-
tive share, and had no further
interest in said estate; and
upon approximate value he
had taken the homestead at
$4,000 and lot "a at $4,000.
making his distributive share
upon the basis of 100000, |
which was denied by Lizzie
Webb and others, heirs and
legatees of said will, as illegal
and void.
1.-The court finds that a
legal construction Of said will
is that the decedent intended
the property should vest in
his executors for the equal
profit Of all his heirs. The
residences were only devised
as privilege to occupy, until
a final or partial distribution
be made; and then to convey
to each their respective resi-.
dences, and they were to
account to the trustees for
the value Of each. at the time
distribution is made, OF what
they sold for, if sold.
1.-The court further finds
that an executor that has
qualified can not withdraw
from his trust without filing
his account. If final, he is
discharged by his settlement
with the court; if partial, he
must tender his resignation,
which must be accepted by
the court or he still remains
executor and responsible for
said trust. They are bound
to settle with the court,
charging themselves with all
the assets Of said estate, and
they are entitled to credit for
all distribution made in behalf
of said estate. Any settle
ment made by and between
the heirs is worthless, unless
approved by the court upon
their report to said court at
the time of said settlement
or distribution. Therefore
their settlement of 1856 can
not be held as a full settle
ment Of said estate or settle
ment of one of the heirs COM
from that date to
settle with the court. They
must commence their account
70 |