Case Name: Hoobler v. Kuhns
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1886-04-05
Citations: 19 Ill. App. 634
Docket Number: No. 1414
Parties: Hoobler v. Kuhns.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports
Volume: 19
Pages: 634–635

Head Matter:
No. 1414.
Hoobler v. Kuhns.
This was an action of assumpsit by the appellee against the appellant to recover a claim for the payment of one third of a decree rendered jointly in the circuit court against appellant, appellee and one Jacob Phillips. It appears that the appellee, appellant and Jacob Phillips were administrators of the estate of William 0. Iloobler, deceased. That in the final settlement of the estate the three administrators were short in their accounts, and that after final report, which was untrue, David H. Hoobler, one of the heirs, prosecuted his suit in chancery in the circuit court against the three administrators to recover such shortage, which resulted in his obtaining a decree against them for the sum of $979.45 and costs of suit, and that afterward each of the said administrators paid one third of said decree,, and one third of the costs. The appellee’s suit was based on the charge that during the time the administrators were settling the estate the appellant managed all the business, received and handled all the money, and made the reports to the court; that appellee signed the reports, believing them to' be true; that such reports proved to be false; that the appellant had collected the amount of the decree, which he retained and did not inventory, and had converted to his own use without the knowledge or consent of the appellee. The suit -resulted in a verdict and judgment for appellee against appellant for $365-.68. This appeal is taken to reverse the judgment, which it is claimed is manifestly against the weight of trie evidence-
Upon an examination of the evidence the court affirms the judgment.
Attorneys, for appellant, Messrs. McIlduff & Tor rane; for appellee, Messrs. H. N. Ryan and Mr. A. E. Harding.

Opinion:
Opinion by
Laoey, P. J.
Judge below, N. J.Pillsuury.
Opinion filed April 5, 1886.