Case Name: Michael Hubley president of the Orphans' Court of Lancaster County against James Hamilton
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1794-05
Citations: 1 Yeates 392
Docket Number: 
Parties: Michael Hubley president of the Orphans’ Court of Lancaster County against James Hamilton.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Yeates)
Volume: 1
Pages: 391–391

Head Matter:
Michael Hubley president of the Orphans’ Court of Lancaster County against James Hamilton.
On a valuation of the real estate of an intestate, the person accepting it is bound to pay interest for the distributive shares of the other children, from the time of his acceptance.
Debt on recognizance, on the valuation of the real estate of a person who had died intestate.
A question was made in this cause, whether on the valuation of the real estate of an intestate, in case it could not be divided without prejudice to or spoiling of the whole, the person accepting it was bound to pay interest for the distributive shares of the other children, from the time of the confirmation of the inquisition and his acceptance of the lands, or from the time limited and appointed by the Orphans’ Court for the payment thereof.
Mr. Hopkins, pro quer. Mr. Montgomery, pro def.

Opinion:
Per cur.
The practice in Lancaster, and most of the western counties, has been uniformly only to charge interest from the time affixed by the Orphans' Court; and most appraise-ments probably have been made under this idea of the usage. It might be inequitable therefore, to make this case an exception out of the general custom. But the act of 4 Geo. 3, (Prov. Laws, ed. 1775, pa. 308,) does not warrant this construction. The men appointed by the Orphans' Court, or where the parties cannot agree, the inquest, are to make a just appraisement. The Orphans' Court are appointed to limit a reasonable time for the payment of the shares of the other children, but not to controul or substantially alter the sum affixed by those on whom that duty devolves by law. Upon the same principles precisely, that a widow under the practice, gets her interest on one third of the principal charged on the lands, from the time of the child's acceptance of the real property at a valuation. In order to obtain a subsistence thereout, the children ought to receive the interest on their distributive shares, from the same period, and for the same purpose. The present usage is fundamentally wrong and must in future be altered.