Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt

First page of the opinion Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt, in Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1814.

Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt, 16 Va. (2 Munf.) 148 (1811), was a case involving division of a residuum.

Background

Sarah Hunt was one of seven residuary legatees of the last will of Turner Richardson. She and her husband, Elijah Hunt, brought suit in the Richmond Court of Chancery against John and Samuel Richardson, the executors of Turner Richardson's estate, to recover her share of the estate. According to a clause in the will, she was entitled to one-seventh of the estate, in money, the value of which would be determined by neighbors. At trial, Elizabeth Ellis, another legatee, testified as to the valuation and sale of the estate, while also admitting that she had an interest in the outcome of the lawsuit.

The Court's Decision

On June 4, 1805, the Court of Chancery decreed in favor of the Sarah Hunt and ordered the defendant to pay her one-seventh of the estate, plus interest. The Court of Appeals reversed the decree, finding that the other residuary legatees, who were not added to the case, were necessary parties. The Court of Appeals also found that Elizabeth Ellis's testimony had been improperly admitted and could not serve as evidence due to her bias as an interested party in the suit. The case was then sent back with the stipulation that all legatees be made parties and that Elizabeth Ellis's testimony not be read into evidence.

See also

• Wythe's Judicial Career