Case Name: Dietrich's Appeal
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1834-05
Citations: 2 Watts 332
Docket Number: 
Parties: Dietrich’s Appeal.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Volume: 2
Pages: 332–333

Head Matter:
Dietrich’s Appeal.
An administrator, pendente lite, has nothing to do, in his official capacity, with a feigned issue to try the validity of a will; and cannot charge the expenses of it in his account.
An administrator, pendente lite, should be allowed to have a reasonable sum in his hands to meet contingencies, upon which he should not be charged with interest.
APPEAL by Adam Dietrich, administrator of Henry Dietrich deceased, who was administrator pendente lite of Philip Dietrich deceased. Philip Dietrich made a will devising his real estate, the validity of which was contested in a feigned issue. During the pendency of this issue, letters of administration were granted to Henry Dietrich, who attended and paid the expenses and counsel fees. After his death, letters of administration on his estate, issued to Adam Dietrich, who filed an account in the orphan’s court, and prayed credits for these expenses and fees, to an amount exceeding 3000 dollars; which the court struck out of the account; and charged the accountant’s intestate’s estate with interest on all the money which came to his hands.
Ellmaker and Hopkins, for appellant.
Montgomery and Jenkins, for appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
An administrator pendente lite has nothing to do, as such, with the contest for the establishment of the will, and cannot charge the expenses of it in his account; more especially he cannot pay his own counsel out of the estate, for services in a contest, whose consequences may affect the title to his land. The parties to such a contest must pay their expenses out of their own pockets, instead of carrying it on at the cost of another. But from the sum on which the administrator was charged with interest here, must be deducted the price of the goods, and the cash on hand, in all 400 dollars, as there is no proof that he used it, and the amount is no more than might be kept on hand for contingencies. The bonds are presumed to have borne interest, and he was, therefore, properly charged with it.
Decree accordingly.