(DOWNLOAD) "Pitts v. Watkins" by In the Supreme Court of Mississippi # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Pitts v. Watkins
- Author : In the Supreme Court of Mississippi
- Release Date : January 14, 2005
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 62 KB
Description
Probate Proceedings — Testamentary Trustees — Banks — Settlement of Account — Objectors not Entitled to Jury Trial — Investment of Trust Funds — Ratification by Cestuis — Insanity — Burden of Proof — Presumptions — United States Mail — Denial of Receipt by Addressee — Conflict in Evidence — Findings — When Conclusive on Appeal. Probate Proceedings — Testamentary Trustees — Settlement of Accounts — Objecting Cestuis Que Trustent not Entitled to Jury Trial. 1. In a proceeding instituted under section 10352, Revised Codes 1921, by testamentary trustees praying for settlement of their accounts, objecting cestuis que trustent were not entitled to trial by jury. Same — Equity — Jurisdiction of Trial Court. 2. The district court, sitting in probate in a proceeding by testamentary trustees seeking settlement of their accounts, has the same general jurisdiction and powers as are exercised by a court of equity over trusts. Same — Investments of Estate Funds by Testamentary Trustees — Inapplicability of Statutes. 3. The provision of section 10306, Revised Codes 1921, that pending settlement of an estate the district court may order any moneys in the hands of executors or administrators to be loaned for not to exceed one year, in United States, state, county, approved municipal bonds or real estate mortgages only, held to have no application to investments made by testamentary trustees in charge of closed estates and of which distribution has been made, such trustees not being named therein and the provision being unworkable in such cases. Same — Testamentary Trustees — Investments — When Beneficiary Waives Claim for Resulting Losses. 4. Where a beneficiary under a will placing the estate in charge of testamentary trustees is sui juris and competent to bind himself at the time he consents to or approves investments of funds of the estate by the trustees, he waives all claim against them for resulting loss.
 "Pitts v. Watkins" by In the Supreme Court of Mississippi # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}