My Family Tree

Sacramento Daily Union, Volume 95, Number 124, 25 June 1898
MAY BE CALLED INTO COURT.
AN ADMINISTRATOR'S RESPONSIBILITY.
A Decision by Judge Hughes That May Concern Many Estates.

Judge Hughes yesterday filed his decision in the matter of the application by Agnes Belle Rhcads, an heir-at-law of the estate of Amy E. Potter, deceased, for an order of court to examine the administrator thereof under oath, and for his removal as such administrator. The court says: Amy E. Potter died on or about the 7th day of October, 1897, and thereafter, about the 12th day of November of the same year, Thomas F. CHATFIELD, a son of said deceased, was duly appointed as administrator of her estate, regularly qualified, and entered upon the discharge of his duties as such. On the 24 th day of May, 1898, said Agnes Belle Rhoads filed herein her petition setting forth, among- other things, that the estate of said deceased was the owner of certain real property described therein, and situated in the city of San Jose, State of California; that, notwithstanding that it had come to the knowledge of said administrator that said estate was the owner of said property, he had wrongfully failed to have the same inventoried, or to account therefor to said estate. Said petition also contained an averment that said administrator was indebted to the estate of said deceased in the sum of $3,500, for money loaned to him by said deceased during her lifetime, and that said administrator had failed to have any account or inventory of his said indebtedness made or tiled in this proceeding.

The eighth allegation in said petition is as follows: '"That said administrator is suspected by your petitioner of having concealed, embezzled, smuggled, conveyed away and disposed of property, money and goods belonging to said decedent, and has in his possession and knowledge deeds, conveyances, bonds, contracts and other writings which contain evidences of and tend to disclose the right, title, interest and claim of the said decedent, in real and personal property which said administrator has wrongfully and fraudulently neglected and refused to have inventoried and appraised as belonging to said esitate; including the property hereinbefore de-

scribed, and other property." The respondent, CHATFIELD, has filed a motion to strike out and a demurrer to said eighth paragraph in the petition on the ground that it is an attempt by the petitioner to subject him to the provisions of Sections 1450 and 1460 of the Code of Civil Procedure of this State, and that said Sections are not applicable to administrators.