Opinion
No. 32,604.
April 4, 1941.
Executor and administrator — accounting — item chargeable in either of two estates with same beneficiaries — moot question.
Inasmuch as an appealing administrator is subject to a charge in one or the other of two estates wherein the beneficiaries and their interests are identical, it is, under the circumstances of this case, a moot question whether the charge is made against him in one estate rather than the other.
Appeal by Leonard Eriksson as general administrator of the estate of Amelia Palm from a judgment of the district court for Otter Tail county, J. B. Himsl, Judge, affirming an order of the probate court surcharging his final account. Affirmed.
James S. Eriksson, for appellant.
William P. Harrison, for respondents.
In this case (submitted with In re Estate of Palm, 210 Minn. 77, 297 N.W. 765) Leonard Eriksson appeals from the judgment surcharging his account as general administrator of the estate of Amelia Palm. She was the wife of August Palm, whose estate is subject matter of the litigation and decision in the other case, and she perished with him in the Fergus Falls cyclone of 1919.
October 7, 1919, appellant collected $2,021.52 under a policy insuring the life of Mr. Palm in which Mrs. Palm was the beneficiary. He admits that he is chargeable with that sum as of that date but now insists, and this is his whole case, that he should be charged in the other estate, that of the husband, rather than in this one, that of the wife. The beneficiaries of the two are identical, the four children of the deceased Palms. It is utterly immaterial whether Eriksson is charged with the amount in the one or the other estate. Therefore, the question is moot, and he has no ground upon which to argue that it was error to make the charge in this estate.
Judgment affirmed.