TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Morey v. Christian

Morey v. Christian, 1916 OK 996, 169 P. 887
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 28, 1916
Docket
No. 7824
Judges
Hooker
Citations
169 P. 8871916 OK 99669 Okla. 631916 Okla. LEXIS 994

Opinion of the Court — Hooker

Opinion by HOOKER, C.

George Morey, an incompetent, toy Walter R. Wilson, his *64 giuardian, ' instituted this suit in; the superior court of Muskogee county, against Dora Christian, nee Morey, administratrix of ‘ the .estate of William Morey, deceased, and the Southern Surety Company, a corporation, to recover the sum of $10,000 alleged to be due the estate of the said George Morey by the estate of William Morey and the Southern Surety Company, as his surety.

It appears from the allegations of the petition that Walter. R. Wilson was at the time of the institution of said action guardian of George Morey, an incompetent, and that William Morey, deceased, had executed a bond with the Sojithern 'Surety Company as bis surety. After his qualification as guardian the said William Morey is alleged to have received the sum of $40,000 belonging to his ward, George Morey, of which amount he converted to his own use the sum of $10,000. Before the said George Morey arrived at the age of majority, and before any settlement was made by William Morey, as guardian of the estate of George Morey, a minor, the said William Morey died, and Dora Christian, nee Morey, qualified as the administratrix of his estate and this suit was instituted by George Morey, incompetent, by Walter R., Wilson, his guardian, against the administratrix of the estate of William Morey, and the surety upon the bond of William Morey, as guardian, aforesaid, to recover 'the money alleged to have been converted by William Morey to his own use and 'benefit while acting as the guardian of George Morey, a minor.

A demurrer was filed to said petition by the Southern Surety Company, and the same was sustained by the court upon the sole reason that a settlement of the account of a guardian in the county court is a condition precedent to a recovery against the surety upon the guardian’s bond, and that independent action will not lie, therefor, in a court of equity to recover the sum alleged to be due.

It is to be observed that the petition in this case alleges that the guardian, William Morey, died intestate and insolvent without having made an accounting to his wayd or without having made an accounting to the county court for the funds collected by him as guardian, and which it is claimed were converted to his own use.

The Southern Surety Company in a well-written brief urges here that the action of the superior court in sustaining this demurrer was proper. AAre cannot agree with the contention urged by it, for this question has been determined adversely to it, in a well-considered opinion by Mr. Justice Hardy in Donnell v. Dansby, 58 Okla. 105 , 159 Pac. 317 , wherein this court said:

“Where a guardia.n dies without an accounting the settlement of his affairs as guardian having been made in the county court, for former wards may maintain an action in the superior or district court against his personal representatives and the sureties on hi® bond as guardian for such accounting and settlement.

“In such action the court has jurisdiction to state the account of the deceased guardian with his ¡wards, and may hear evidence, and allow defendants any credits to which the deceased was lawfully entitled, and may determine the balance due, if any, by said guardian, and render judgment agaist the sureties therefor.”

It is further held that:

“It was not necessary that a claim for a. fund wrongfully misappropriated by a guardian be presented to the administrator of such guardian before an action for the recovery thereof can be. maintained.”

Whatever may be the rule in. other states, by the above Opinion it is definitely settled in this state that an action by the ward will lie against the administrator of the estate of the deceased guardian atíd the surety upon the official 'bond of such guardian who died without making a settlement with his ward, or an accounting with the county court. And the opinion of the lower court sustaining a demurrer is hereby reversed, and Jihis cause remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1920: 21935: 119202026peak 1920 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Neal v. Hodges13 F. Supp. 916 (N.D. Okla. 1935)
  2. Equitable Surety Co. v. Sapp1920 OK 76, 187 P. 917
  3. Johnson v. Henshaw1920 OK 383, 193 P. 998

Most recent

  1. Neal v. Hodges13 F. Supp. 916 (N.D. Okla. 1935)
  2. Johnson v. Henshaw1920 OK 383, 193 P. 998
  3. Equitable Surety Co. v. Sapp1920 OK 76, 187 P. 917

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Bell, 1916 OK 667, 159 P. 336 49
Donnell v. Dansby, 159 P. 317 (Okla. 1916) 35

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list