Summary

Pierce Butler Forrest v. Jack — Opinion of the Court

As a general rule, the person in whose name the stock stands on the books of the bank is liable, [2] but the actual owner may be held although the stock has not been registered in his name. [3] The liability does not altogether cease on the death of the owner but, as limited and defined by section 66, attaches to his estate. [4] The fiduciaries are exempt but the property belonging to the estate is liable as would be the deceased if living. No cause of action arises until the assessment is made by the Comptroller and, so far as concerns the need and amount, his findings are conclusive.
Source: Wikisource

Pierce Butler Forrest v. Jack — Opinion of the Court

The fact that the administrator was not formally discharged until December 1, 1931, about the time the bank failed, is without significance here as the Comptroller's assessment was not made until March 8, 1932. As the estate had ceased to exist before the bank became insolvent, the Circuit Court of Appeals rightly held that petitioner as administrator was not required by Utah law (R.S. 1933, 102-9-26) to retain or pay into court any property or money to cover possible future liability in respect of the stock that had been decreed and distributed to the widow.
Source: Wikisource

Pierce Butler Forrest v. Jack — Opinion of the Court

The complaint asserts devastavit in that the petitioner as administrator failed to pay into court or to retain property sufficient to cover the assessment or to transfer the stock to a solvent person and disposed of the entire estate except the stock. It also alleges that the real property deeded petitioner by his mother, having been conveyed to him without consideration, is subject to a lien for the amount of the assessment.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature