The San Francisco call., 1897-01-01
CHARLES KOHLER'S
CREDITORS LUCKY
They Will Be Paid in Full
for All Their
Claims.
Judge Coffey Decides That the
Testator's Mother Must
Wait.
She Was Her Sons Partner, and His
Individual Bills Must Be
Settled First.

| Creditors of the estate of the late Charles
| Kohler and others similarly situated will
| be interested in a decision handed down
| by Judge Coffey yesterday in which Mrs.
| Elise Kohler, a surviving mem ber of the
| firm OF Kohler Il Frohling AMI mother of
| the decedent, sought to have her claim
against the Charles Kohler estate prorated
with the claims OF other creditors.
George Il. Blucher is an individual
creditor of the decedent testator. Charles
| Kohler, who was member of the firm of
Kohler & Frohling, partnership very
| largely indebted to many persons. The
affairs of the partnership are not yet set
| tied.
| In case the assets of the firm shall prove
| insufficient 10 discharge the partnership
debts, Judge Coffey says, then the estate
OF the testator will be liable. e
The account OF the executor says the
court, shows that he has sufficient cash on
hand to alisfy all the separate creditors,
with surplus. Butcher asks, therefore,
that the executor be directed to pay his
| claim in full as separate creditor.
| Other claims have been presented,
among them that of Mrs. Elise Kohler for
large sum. Mrs. Kohler's claims have
| been allowed and approved by the pro-
| bate court as contingent claims against
| the estate in question, and it is contended
| that in the circumstances OF the case and
| under the articles OF copartnership of
! Kohler & FrohIlng, OF which she was a
| mem ber, Mrs. Kohler is entitled to rank
| as a separate creditor, and as. if that be
| so, the assets OF the estate at present will
be insufficient to pay all the creditors OF
| that class Mrs. Kohler's attorne Us suggest
| that the utmost the court may now 40 is
! to make pro ra payment.
| The claim of Mrs. Konler arise from her
paying the one-third of the losses of the
| firm of Kohler IL Frohling that would
| have been paid by Charles Kohler if he
| had lived and had been financially open to
respond to those demands. Mrs. Kohler is
| held for losses and must make them good
out OF her personal estate, for which
reason she contends that she has right
to stand as an individual creditor on an
equal footing with other creditors.
clause In the copartnership agreement
reads: "ltls furt er agreed tnat said Elise
Kohler, Charles Kohler and Hans H Koh-
ler shall each bear alike one-third of all
the losses, if any, of SAID business"
The point before the courtowas to deter
mine whether Mrs. Kohier's claims are to
be classed as partnership claims or as
separate claims.
The estate had on haud SIS. .959 96. and
Mrs. Kohler, amount 10 but $Ii, 740 SO.
The claims of Mrs. Kohler foo up $1U6, 1896,
and she objected to paying the claims OF
others unless she should be allowed her
proportion OF the funds in the hands of
the executor.
Blucher objected to this on the ground
that. Mrs. Kohler must rely on the assets
OF the estate of the deceased after his in
dividual debts are liquidated. In support
ing this view Judge Coffey said that the
question was re oved finally into this
form: Whether the claims of Mrs. Elise
Kohler. as The surviving partner of Kohler
q IRONING, were emitted to preference as
against the estate of CHARLES Kohler. de-
ceased, over the liabilities created by him
individually in his lifetime, as was the
claim OF b ucher. think not''
The order that Blucher be paid was
made, ana all of Kohler's individual cred
itors viii now receive payment in full in