Bidwell v. . King

RodMAN, J. Two objections are made to plaintiff’s action. 1. That it should have been brought in the Probate Court. We are of opinion that it should have been. The facts do not bring it within the principles decided in the case of Miller v. Barnes 65 N. C. Rep. 67. Here it is not alleged that the *288 defendant ever promised to pay the principal of the legacy ; although it is alleged that he promised to pay the annual interest, and failed to do it. The Probate Court has general original jurisdiction of actions to recover legacies. Bell v. King, 70 N. C. Rep 330, and no circumstance is here alleged to make the case an exception to the general rule. The Superior Court had no jurisdiction of the action. 2. An executor is entitled to be sued in the county in which he proved the will and qualified as executor. Stanly v. Mason, 69 N. C. Rep. 1, and Foy v. Morehead, Id. 512. Pee Cukiam. Action dismissed.