Case Name: Downing's Estate
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1836-05
Citations: 5 Watts 90
Docket Number: 
Parties: Downing’s Estate.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Volume: 5
Pages: 90–90

Head Matter:
Downing’s Estate.
When a final administration account has been confirmed, the remedy for omissions or mistakes is a petition for a review in the court below, and not a citation to the administrators to settle a supplemental account.
APPEAL from the orphan’s court of Lancaster county.
William Downing and Gainor Moore had settled their administration account of Samuel Downing’s estate. It being alleged by the heirs that the administrators had received moneys with which they had not charged themselves, they petitioned the court for a citation to them to appear and settle a supplemental account: in answer to which the administrators said that no estate had come to them since their account was settled. Whereupon the court dismissed the application for an attachment, and the heirs appealed.
Eastburn and Norris, for appellants,
cited M’Fadden v. Geddis, 17 Serg. & Rawle 339; App v. Driesbach, 2 Rawle 287; Pamph. L. of 1832, p. 195, sect. 22.
Champneys and Ellmaker, contra,
were stopped by the court.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The appellants have mistaken their course. If they have received injury, their remedy is by petition for a review in the court below. The accountants have no additional matter to exhibit; and while the final decree of confirmation remains unopened, it is conclusive.
Appeal quashed.