Appeal of Brown
SUPREME COURT of Pennʃylvania:
The Appeal of BROWN EXOR. of EDGAR.
T
HIS was an appeal from the Orphan's Court of Philadelphia county on the following cafe. Brown, having received Ł 400. on account of the eftate of his Teftator Edgar, paid it over (according to his uniform practice upon fuch occafions) to his Co-executor Dogherty. In Brown's books this money was charged, generally, as fo much cafh paid to Dogherty ; but, in Dogherty's books, credit was given for it on account of the eftate of Edgar. Dogherty became infolvent ; and upon a fettlement of Brown's adminiftration, the Orphan's Court refufed to allow him the Ł400. thus paid over to his Co-executor; but charged him with the principal fum, and intereft from the time he received, ‘till the year 1776, (nine years) dropping the intereft from that time ‘till 1781, and afterwards reviving it.It was argued in January Term by Wilcocks in fupport of the appeal, and Lewis againft it ; when three points were made ; 1ft, Whether, the money was a loan to Dogherty, or a payment to the eftate of Edgar, Brown was thereby difcharged ; and 3d, Whether intereft was payable to the refiduary Legatees, who were the Appellees upon this occafion.
The chief justice, having ftated the points that were made in the caufe, now delivered the opinion of the Court.
M‘Kean,Chieƒ Juʃtice. –From the evidence we muft determine, on the firʃt point, that the money was a payment to the eftate of Edgar. It was Brown's conftant practice to transfer all his receipts
1788.
to Dogherty; and this fum of Ł 400. is credited to him in the accounts of the eftate kept by the latter.
With refpect to the ʃecond and third points, it muft be obferved, that the Courts of Chancery make it a general rule, that he who receives money fhould be anfwerable for it ; and, therefore, if one Executor becomes infolvent, or bankrupt, the other fhall not be charged. There is a difference, however, between Legatees and Creditors ; the former being appointed, as well as the Executor, by virtue of the Teftator's will ; and confequently cannot impofe the fame refponfibility as the latter. The cafe in 1 P. Wms. 244. is the only one in point ; but on that authority, and the juftice of the matter itfelf, under all its circumftances, we are of opinion that, although Brown would be chargeable if there were creditors, and a deficiency of affets to fatisfy them ; yet, that he is not anfwerable to the Legatees.
The Ł400. muft therefore be deducted from the account, with the nine years intereft which is charged upon it. As to the reft, we think Brown ought to be well fatisfied to pay the intereft; particularly as it is not charged from the year 1776 to the year 1781.
The decifion of the Orphan's Court was accordingly affirmed; deducting Ł400, and nine year intereft, from the account.