McPike v. Hasbrouck

STURTEVANT, J. Heretofore H. W. McPike, administrator of the estate of Margaret A. Jennings, deceased, presented to the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the City and County of San Francisco, sitting as a probate court, his first annual account. Thereafter, on the 4th day of November, 1936, the said court made an order allowing the account in part, disallowing certain items, and modifying the amount as to some other items. Later the administrator appealed from certain portions of said order. Other facts will be stated below when the occasion arises.

The administrator states his first point as follows: “Does the statute, Probate Code section 902, authorize the court to refuse all extraordinary compensation to an administrator who has rendered ‘any extraordinary services, such as . . . litigation in regard to the property of the estate’ where the whole estate is involved in the litigation and successfully defended by the administrator?” The point as stated may not, under the facts of this case, be answered directly. It assumes that this administrator rendered extraordinary services. The record does not sustain the assumption. Soon after the death of the decedent, H. W. McPike applied for and was granted letters of administration. Immediately thereafter he qualified and at once went to the Hibernia Savings and Loan Society and drew out of that bank $4,211.28, and put it in his attorney’s safe. Said sum of money was the sole item of property coining into the hands of the administrator. A short time after the appellant qualified as administrator, Annie Gillespie made a demand on him that he surrender all of said money to her, claiming that said money was by the decedent orally transferred to her under a contract duly entered into and by the terms of which Annie Gillespie agreed to care for the decedent during the remainder of her life. The administrator refused to surrender the property and thereupon Annie Gillespie commenced an action against him to recover said moneys. Except as noted below, the record discloses that he, personally, performed no services whatever in connection with the defense of said action. However, it does disclose [208]that his father, Mr. H. H. McPike, who is an attorney at law, took charge of and conducted said litigation for him. At one time when Mr. H. H. McPike was ill, the administrator, in company with Mr. James Peck, another attorney at law, went into court, but the record does not disclose that the administrator did anything except to listen to the proceedings had. The record also discloses that he looked up some authorities for and turned the information over to his father. Under these circumstances we think it is clear that the trial court did not err in finding the administrator did not render any extraordinary services and the court did not err in refusing to allow him any extraordinary compensation.