Case Name: Sargent & a., Adm'rs, v. Sanborn & a.
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire
Decision Date: 1889-12
Citations: 66 N.H. 30
Docket Number: 
Parties: Sargent & a., Adm'rs, v. Sanborn & a.
Judges: Carpenter, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
Reporter: New Hampshire Reports
Volume: 66
Pages: 30–31

Head Matter:
Sargent & a., Adm'rs, v. Sanborn & a.
A party contesting a will is not, as matter of right, entitled to examine private papers of the testator in the hands of a special administrator, hut permission to make such examination should he granted or refused as justice may require in the circumstances.
Bill in Equity, by the special administrators of H. Sanborn, for instructions on the question whether it is their duty to comply with the request of C. H. Sanborn, a son of the testator, who has appealed from a probate decree allowing his will, for an opportu iuty to examine the diaries kept by the testator, H. Sanborn, during the last seven years of his life. The reasons of appeal are insanity and undue influence. The executors under the will object to such examination. Facts agreed.
H. G. Sargent, for the plaintiffs.
Bingham, Mitchell & Fletcher, for C. H. Sanborn.
Chase & Streeter, for the executors.

Opinion:
Doe, C. J.
A special administrator may be appointed when there is delay in determining the final grant of administration. Such special administrator, under such directions and restrictions as may be inserted in bis commission, shall return an inventory of the estate of the deceased, and take care of and preserve the property and effects of the deceased, and do all other acts which lie may be directed to perform by the judge of probate or the supreme court." G. L., c. 195, ss. 18, 20. The question whether justice requires that an administrator or executor should allow persons contesting the will of the deceased to have an opportunity to examine his diaries or other private papers, may depend upon the contents of the papers and the use that could be made of them. There may be reasons for granting the appellant's request, and there may be reasons for denying it. Administrators, general or special, are not imder an official obligation to comply with such requests without regard to tbe character of the writings or the circumstances of tlie case. The agreed facts do not show what tbe plaintiffs' duty is.
Case discharged.
Carpenter, J., did not sit: the others concurred.