Case Name: TREDWAY et, Admr., In Re
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1927-11-07
Citations: 5 Ohio Law Abs. 805
Docket Number: No. 89
Parties: TREDWAY et, Admr., In Re.
Judges: (Richards and Lloyd, JJ., concur.)
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 5
Pages: 805–805

Head Matter:
TREDWAY et, Admr., In Re.
Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist., Fulton Co.
No. 89.
Decided Nov. 7, 1927.
Paxson & Canfield, Wauseon, for plaintiffs in error.
F. S. & J. M. Ham and Thos. F. Ham, Wau-seon, for defendants in error.

Opinion:
OPINION OF COURT.
The following is taken, verbatim, from the opinion.
WILLIAMS, J.
One of the most important duties devolving upon an administrator of an estate is to collect the debts due the estate and where an administrator has in his hands, as part of the assets, a note secured by a mortgage upon leal estate, it is his duty to collect the note and, if necessary, foreclose the mortgage, and it is wholly beyond his power and authority as personal representative of the estate to accept a conveyance of the real estate in satisfaction of the indebtedness evidenced by the note and mortgage. And if he wrongfully does so, he can not properly and legally charge himself in the account with moneys expended in connection with or in furtherance of the transaction; nor can he properly list, in his account, as a part of the funds of the estate, the real estate so wrongfully and unlawfully conveyed to him.
The judgment of the Common Pleas, in sustaining the exceptions and disallowing the items in the account excepted to, was not erroneous and the judgment will be affirmed.
(Richards and Lloyd, JJ., concur.)