In re Estate of Hale
Before: Fleet
Synopsis
Estates of Deceased Persons—Partial Distribution—Payment of Annuities—Finding of Fact.—Upon petition of legatees to whom bequests-had been made in the nature of a life annuity in equal monthly payments, for a partial distribution to them of unpaid -arrears, and ■ of future monthly payments, a finding that the estate was but little indebted, and that the payments prayed for might be made without loss to the creditors of the estate, and that there would remain, after such payment, sufficient property in the hands of the administratrix to pay in full all debts, costs, and expenses of administration, and all devises and legacies under the will, is a finding of fact which, though placed among the conclusions of law, as a legal deduction from probative facts, embraces tbe essential, ultimate facts which are indispensable under the statute to authorize and empower the court to make the order prayed for. Unless these facts exist, there is no right to partial distribution, no matter what may be the condition of the estate in other respects.
Id.—Finding Against Evidence.—Where the evidence shows an estate valued at four hundred and sixty-two thousand dollars, with admitted subsisting liabilities of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, and a probable and possible additional indebtedness amounting in the aggregate to more than four hundred thousand dollars, and that to take the money necessary to pay annuities would deprive the administratrix of means to pay the interest on the allowed demands and the current expenses of administration, and would probably greatly embarrass the estate by requiring a sacrifice of its property at forced sale, the finding that the estate was but little indebted, and that payment of the annuities might be made without loss or injury to the creditors of the estate, etc., is against the evidence.
Id.—Annuities Charged uros Pabticudar Property.—The fact that the annuities were to be paid out of the income of particular property, upon which they were primarily made a charge, does not entitle the persons to whom they were bequeathed to payment of them, when the general condition of the estate will not permit of such payment; but that property is as much chargeable with the debts and other obligations of the estate as any other, if necessary to be resorted to for that purpose, and, where the evidence does not show that resort thereto will not be required, to meet a large actual and possible indebtedness, an order for payment of the annuities cannot be sustained.
Id.—Partial Distribution—Bond foe Proportion of Indebtedness.—The only occasion upon which the giving of a bond by persons petitioning for a partial distribution can be dispensed with is where it appears that the time for presenting claims against the estate has expired, and all claims that have been allowed have been paid, or are secured by mortgage upon real estate sufficient to pay them, and the court is satisfied that no injury can result to the estate; and where the evidence shows that a large proportion of the demands were unsecured by mortgage, or otherwise, and that such unsecured demands had not been paid, the court has no authority to dispense with the requirement of a bond.
VAN FLEET, J. By his will the deceased, among other dispositions, left to Mary Hale and Margaret Byan, his sisters, and John Hale, a brother, each a bequest in the nature of a life annuity in the sum- of $50 per month. The will was probated in May, 1893.
In June, 1896, the respondents filed petitions in the court below setting up that said annuities had not been paid; that the estate was in a condition to pay the same, and praying a distribution thereof, and asking that the amounts accrued thereon respectively be ordered paid -at once, and that thereafter the monthly payments be made as they should fall due.
The widow, as administratrix with the will annexed and' as a devisee under the will, and the daughter, as a devisee, and certain creditors of the estate, made opposition to the granting of the petitions, setting up that the estate was largely indebted, and that such distribution could not then be had without detriment to the interests of the estate and injury to the creditors. The petitions were heard together, and the court made findings [127]of fact upon which, it based an order granting the distribution asked. The order directed the administratrix to pay to Mary Hale $2,492.36, to John Hale a like sum, and to Margaret Ryan $622.20, found to be the amounts respectively accrued and unpaid upon said annuities, and directed the administratrix to thereafter make payments upon said annuities monthly as they should fall due. These amounts were directed to be paid out of any funds then in the hands of the administratrix, or which should thereafter be received by her from the rents or profits of a certain parcel of real estate upon which, by the terms of the will, said annuities were made primarily chargeable. From this order the parties making the opposition thereto appeal.
1. The objection most strongly urged against the propriety of the order is, that the evidence does not sustain the findings upon which the order rests; and we are satisfied that this objection must be sustained.
The material facts found by the court were: “That the estate of said deceased is but little indebted, and that the shares of said Mary Hale, Margaret Ryan, and John Hale, prayed for in their said petitions, may be allowed to them without loss to the creditors of said estate, and that there will remain in the hands of the administratrix undisturbed, after the payment and delivery to them of their respective shares, sufficient property of the said estate to pay in full all claims and debts against and all creditors of said estate, and also all costs and expenses of administration, and all devises and legacies under the will of said testator.”
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)