Burkhalter v. Norton

The Surrogate. It appears to be an undisputed fact that the administrator was and is insolvent, and that the debt established against him is uncollectible. It is, therefore, claimed on his behalf that, although his indebtedness is established, yet he should be credited with the amount thereof, as in the case of any other uncollected and uncollectible claim. To prove his inability to collect it by legal process was impossible, as he could not sue himself, and this is the only forum where even the question of his liability could be determined (Churchill v. Prescott, 3 Bradf., 233). He now stands in the same position as any other debtor to the deceased, the amount of whose indebtedness was omitted from the inventory, and his liability therefor, as administrator, is to be determined -in the same manner. The amount of the claim should be added to the sum of the inventory, and then the same, if the debtor proved to be insolvent, should be credited to the administrator. [612] The administrator stands, too, in the same position as any other debtor, in this respect. Should he become possessed of means to pay his indebtedness, he may be compelled, by the parties in interest, to account for, and pay over the amount thereof, in the same manner as if he had, after an accounting, recovered a doubtful claim from a third person, for which he had received credit on such accounting. The decree will be entered in accordance with these views. •