In re Estate Nerac

By the Court, Sanderson, J.: The ease shows that Ellen ETerae died on the 11th of November, 1863, leaving a last will and testament, by which she bequeathed her entire estate to Adrien Sagiel. That after administration, there was left of the estate, in the hands of the administrator, the sum of one thousand three hundred and twenty dollars and ten cents, coming, by virtue of the will, to Sagiel.

That on the 26th of Elovember, 1862, Sagiel was convicted of a felony, and sentenced to imprisonment in the State Prison for the term of fifteen years, and that he is now in the State Prison, under and by virtue of said sentence.

That on the 8th day of April, 1867, one Knox recovered a judgment against Sagiel for the sum of five hundred dollars, and costs, which he afterwards assigned to one Clark, who is the appellant in this case.

That on the 13th of March, 1867, the administrator petitioned the Probate Court for a decree of distribution. At the hearing, Clark appeared and presented his judgment, duly authenticated, and petitioned the Court to apply so much of the money coming to Sagiel as would be required for that purpose to the payment and satisfaction of his claim.

The Court denied the petition of the appellant, and directed the money to be paid to Sagiel upon the termination of his imprisonment either by pardon or by the expiration of the term.

It is suggested by counsel that the denial of appellant’s petition was founded in part by the Court below upon the one hundred and forty-fifth section of the Act in relation to crimes and punishments, which provides that a “ sentence of [396]imprisonment in the State Prison for a term less than life suspends all civil rights of the person so sentenced during the term of imprisonment, and forfeits all public offices and all private trusts, authority and power; and the person sentenced to such imprisonment for life shall thereafter be deemed civilly dead.”

By this provision of the statute the civil rights of Sagiel were suspended during the term of his imprisonment, except as hereinafter stated; but the civil rights of ICnox and Clark were not suspended. The former had a right to sue, and the latter has a right to subject the property of Sagiel to the satisfaction of his judgment, for the sentence worked no forfeiture of Sagiel’s estate.