Case Name: John Patton v. Flora L. Bostwick, executrix for Victor M. Bostwick
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1878-06-21
Citations: 39 Mich. 218
Docket Number: 
Parties: John Patton v. Flora L. Bostwick, executrix for Victor M. Bostwick.
Judges: The other Justices concurred.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 39
Pages: 218–219

Head Matter:
John Patton v. Flora L. Bostwick, executrix for Victor M. Bostwick.
Appeal from commissioners.
A claim for money due upon a decedent’s mitten agreement can properly be submitted to tbe commissioners upon his estate, and if disallowed the only remedy is by appeal from them; a bill in chancery is not a proper proceeding.
Appeal from Barry.
Submitted June 20.
Decided June 21.
Bill eor accounting for rents and profits. Defendant appeals.
May, Buck & Powers and Oscar T. Tuthill for. complainant.
Commissioners on an estate cannot hear claims for a balance due from their decedent to a partner, Gray v. Palmer, 9 Cal., 616; nor a claim against a deceased trustee for the execution of the trust, Gunter v. Janes, id., 643; nor a claim on a promissory note given by a married woman, Brown v. Sumner, 31 Vt., 671; nor can a claim for damages from a failure to condemn land be presented to an administrator, Bullion v. Campbell, 27 Tex., 653.
W. K. Gibson for defendant.

Opinion:
Marston, J.
This was simply a claim for a certain amount of money claimed to be due and owing upon a written agreement entered into by Victor M. Bostwick. After his decease the claim was presented against his estate, for allowance by the commissioners and was disallowed. Instead of taking an appeal a bill in chancery was filed and a decree rendered in favor of complainant. The claim in any view of the case was a proper one to be presented against the estate, and it was one which the commissioners had full power and authority to allow. 2 Comp. L., § 4431. If disallowed the only remedy which was left the claimant was by an appeal.
The decree must be reversed and the bill dismissed with costs.
The other Justices concurred.