TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Estate of Swart

Estate of Jacob Swart. Appeal of Peninah A. Swart and Florence V. Dunn

Estate of Swart, 41 A. 1000 (Pa. 1899)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 2, 1899
Docket
Nos. , No. 201
Judges
Dean, Fell, Green, Mitchell, Williams
Citations
41 A. 1000189 Pa. 711899 Pa. LEXIS 603
Disposition
Reversed.
Syllabus
Decedents' estates—One having the right to administer may renounce in-favor of next class. A party entitled to administer the estate of a decedent has the right, upon renunciation, to nominate a person of the class next entitled; and such nomination the register of wills is not at liberty to disregard, except on the ground of personal unfitness or legal incompetency. The register of wills has no right to issue letters of administration to all of the daughters of a decedent, where the widow upon renouncing her right to administer has nominated one of the daughters only.
Summary
Appeal, No. 201, Oct. T., 1898, by Peninah A. Swart et al., from decree of O. G. Green Co., April T., 1898, No. 19, dismissing appeal from register of wills. Appeal from register of wills. Before Ceaweoed, P. J. From the record it appeared that Jacob Swart died intestate, leaving to survive him a widow, Peninah A. Swart, a son, Amos C. Swart, and three daughters, one of whom was Florence Y. Duim. He also left grandchildren who were the children of deceased sons and daughters. The widow renounced and nominated Florence Y. Dunn. The register of wills issued letters of administration to all three of the surviving daughters. Exceptions to the action of the register were on appeal overruled by the orphans’ court. Error assigned was decree of the orphans’ court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Fell

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Opinion by Mb. Justice Fell,

If tbe widow and the son of the decedent had merely renounced their rights to administer, the register would have been at liberty to select any one personally qualified from the class next entitled, under the act of March 15, 1832, to administer: Levan’s App., 112 Pa. 294 . The discretion vested in the register is limited to a selection from each class entitled in its order, and neither he nor the parties renouncing can pass by one of the children competent to administer and vest the appomtment in a stranger: Williams’s App., 7 Pa. 259 ; McClellan’s App., 16 Pa. 110 . But the renunciation was in favor of one of the class next entitled after the widow and the son, and was coupled with a request for her appointment. This nommation the register was not at liberty to disregard except on the ground of personal unfitness or legal incompetency. The right of the party entitled to administer to nominate a person of the next class has been firmly settled by our decisions: Ellmaker’s Est., 4 Watts, 34 ; Bieber’s App., 11 Pa. 157 ; Shomo’s App., 57 Pa. 356 .

Whether it was shown by the testimony produced before the register that the widow was an unfit person to administer the estate because of her advanced age, infirmities and want of business knowledge need not be considered. It certainly was not shown that she was incompetent to make a choice among her children. The action of the register M appointmg all three of the daughters mdicates a desire on his part to treat them fairly and to prevent an unseemly dispute, but in so doing he overlooked the legal rights of the appellants, and it cannot be sustained.

*73 The decree of the orphans’ court is reversed, and it is now ordered and decreed that the register of Greene county do grant letters of administration on the estate of Jacob Swart, deceased, to Florence V. Dunn.

How later courts describe this case

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

1903: 11934: 11957: 11958: 119032026peak 1903 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Schulz Estate139 A.2d 560 (Pa. 1958)
  2. Job's Estate23 Pa. Super. 611 (1903)
  3. Friese's Estate176 A. 225 (Pa. 1934)
  4. Kiker Estate10 Pa. D. & C.2d 674 (1957)

Most recent

  1. Schulz Estate139 A.2d 560 (Pa. 1958)
  2. Kiker Estate10 Pa. D. & C.2d 674 (1957)
  3. Friese's Estate176 A. 225 (Pa. 1934)
  4. Job's Estate23 Pa. Super. 611 (1903)

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 6

DepthCaseCited by
Ellmaker's Estate, 4 Watts 34 (1835) 27
Levan's Appeal, 3 A. 804 (Pa. 1886) 11
In re Bieber's Appeal, 11 Pa. 157 (1849) 8
Williams's Appeal, 7 Pa. 259 (1847) 6
McClellan's Appeal, 16 Pa. 110 (1851) 6
Shomo's Appeal, 57 Pa. 356 (1868) 6

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