
    Haugh v. Seabold.
    
      A. died intestate, leaving an estate not worth over three hundred dollars. After letters of administration had been granted, on petition of the widow, the assets of the estate were, by order of the Court, delivered to, and vested in, her. Suit by the widow upon an account, part of such assets. The defendant pleaded as a set-off a note of the deceased, purchased after his death.
    
      Held, that no claim against the decedent acquired after his property vested in his widow, could be set-off against her claim.
    
      Thursday, December 13.
    APPEAL from the Marion Common Pleas.
    
      R. L. Walpole and K. Ferguson, for appellant.
    
      Wm. Wallace and B. Harrison, for appellee.
   Per Ouriam.

William Seabold died. His estate was worth less than three hundred dollars. The Court vested it in the widow, Margaret Seabold. A part of that estate consisted of an account against Emanuel Haugh. Widow Sea-bold sued Haugh on this account. After William Sedbold’s death, Haugh bought a note which said Seabold had given in his lifetime, and pleaded it as a set-off to Widow Seabold’s demand on the above account. The Court refused to allow the set-off

We think this was right. The estate being of less value than three hundred dollars, the law gave it to the widow, and the account sued on was a part of it. No claim against William Seabold, acquired after his property vested in his widow, could be set-off against her in a suit to recover such vested estate.

The judgment is affirmed, with 5 per cent, damages and costs.  