Cole v. Boarman

Robinson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellant, by his petition, prays that the appellees may be required to report the amount paid to them under a decree in the case of Cole vs. Cole, et al., that an account may be stated by the Auditor, &c. Separate answers were filed by the appellees, and these answers were accepted by the Court below, as a report by the appellees under the decree, and the petition of the appellant was dismissed. If the money found by the decree to be due the appellant, had in fact been paid to the appellees as trustees, we should be obliged to reverse the order of the Circuit Court because the appellees do not in their answers state with sufficient accuracy either the amount paid to them, or the manner of its disbursement.

Mr. Talhott says he paid to Mr. Boarman, solicitor of the appellant, the entire amount decreed by the Court, including interest and costs, and that he has in his posses ²³² sion receipts or vouchers for the whole sum, except six hundred dollars, which said sum Mr. Boarman does not deny having received. Mr. Boarman, instead of showing the precise sum received by Mm and the exact amount paid by him, says the whole amount due to the appellant has been paid to him by Mr. Talbott and himself, “either in cash or by the payment of judgments against the appellant, and that the only balance that has not been paid is the costs about which there is some little trouble,” &c. In his additional answer, he files the appellant’s receipt for one thousand and eighty-five dollars and twenty-three cents, “ in full of claim and decree,” and says he had a paper showing the whole transaction, the payments made by Talbott,