This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1890. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... 1NDEX. ACTION: Removal of, 440. ADMINISTRATION: 1. An administrator ought not to be charged with doubtful notes and accounts, in the absence of anything to show they could have been collected, especially when they appeared to be under the control of some of the plaintiffs. Gay v. Grant. 478. 2. In a proceeding by an administrator to sell the lands of his intes tate to make assets, the heir can plead the statute of limitations to such claims of creditors as have not been reduced to judgment against the administrator. The heir is bound by such judgment, unless he can show that it was obtained by collusive fraud. Proctor v. Proctor, 222. 3. So, where P. was the attorney of an executrix and trustee under a will (she havirg also an interest in the property devised), who was afterwards removed and another administrator d. b. n. c. t. a., having adverse interest, was appointed in his place, and P. became his attorney in the settlement of the estate: Held, that P.'s relations were so conflicting and antagonistic that the law would not sanction his action, and this, though no compensation was actually paid him. Gooch v. Peebles, 411. 4. And where, in proceedings by such admimstrator to sell certain lands of his testator for assets, the attorney, P., who, having purchased an interest of the testator's husband in the lands, was co-defendant with his client, the executrix, obtained a decree of Court without her knowledge, whereby he became entitled to the surplus proceeds of such sale: Held, he could acquire thereby no interest adverse to hers, and the decree should be vacated, so far as it affected or declared his interest. Ibid. 5. The conflict of his duty as attorney for the administrator, charged with protecting the interests of the executrix and her cestui que trustant...