Court Opinion

ID: 9828962
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:53:26.195477+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:55.713873
License: Public Domain

*880On Motion for Rehearing'.
Appellee, in his motion for rehearing, contends that even if he were not acting within his powers of executor in effecting the sales of real property mentioned in the original opinion, he, nevertheless was entitled to some compensation for such services, in that all persons interested in the estate acquiesced in the making of said sales and accepted the benefits thereof. Ap-pellee is in substance sttggesting a recovery upon a quantum meruit count. This theory is not in the case, as it is not raised either by the pleadings (which were written) or by the evidence. Appellee sought to defend his retention of certain sums of money belonging to the estate on the ground that he was entitled to retain the same as and for executor’s commissions. Under the facts of this case, appellants were not es-topped from questioning the legality of ap-pellee’s accounts as executor.
Appellee’s motion for rehearing is overruled.