Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

CAIN v. HUTSON et al.

EDGERTON, Associate Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court dismissing appellant's suit.

Appellees were mortgagees under a bond and mortgage dated June 23, 1932, in the principal sum of $6,800. The mortgage covered real estate in Pennsylvania, and was executed there by Cecil B. Pascoe. By May 10, 1939, when this complaint was filed, appellees had collected over $12,000. This is a suit for an accounting of the sums collected.

Pascoe, the mortgagor, died a resident of Pennsylvania, where his estate is being administered. His administrator is not a party to this suit. Plaintiff-appellant is the executrix of the estate of the mortgagor's mother, now deceased, who was his sole heir and next of kin. Under the laws of both the District of Columbia and Pennsylvania the mortgagor's administrator was a necessary party to this suit. The complaint was rightly dismissed.

His original administrators were named as defendants, but were not served with process and did not appear.

D.C. Code 1940, §§ 20-501, 20-505; Kashouty v. Deep, ___ App.D.C. ___, 126 F.2d 233.

Purdon's Penn.Stat.Ann., Tit. 20, § 772, as amended July 2, 1937, P.L. 2755, § 2; Craig v. Blau, 288 Pa. 547, 136 A. 860.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CAIN v. HUTSON
(Apr 6, 1942)