252 Pa. 575 | Pa. | 1916
Opinion by
Harrington Fitzgerald, surviving executor of the estate of Thomas Fitzgerald, deceased, appeals from the decree of the Orphans’ Court of Philadelphia County dismissing exceptions to the adjudication of the auditing judge refusing to allow commissions on income received from the business of publishing a newspaper known as “The Philadelphia Item.” Testator died in 1891, leaving a Avill wherein he appointed his three sons executors, and requested that they continue the business of publishing the newspaper in question, which formed a large part of his estate. One of the sons died in 1894 and another in 1908. No inventory and appraisement was filed until 1912, when an account was also filed in answer to a citation., The business was continued by the executors, and by the survivor until 1913 when publication of “The Item” was suspended and the plant sold. The court awarded appellant the sum of $4,483.30 as commission on principal, but refused compensation on income.
The total receipts derived from publishing the paper during the period of executorship amounted to approximately four and one half million dollars, and on this amount, a claim of $60,000 was made by appellant for commissions. The newspaper business was conducted by the executors as a family matter and profits paid from time to time to the various members of the family and charged to their individual accounts. Appellant was general business manager and editor of the paper and had the entire responsibility of its management subsequent to the death of his coexecutors. In return for his services he received a stipulated salary, depending upon the nature of the duties he was called upon to perform, which varied from $50 to $150 a week, and in ad
That an executor may waive or renounce his right to compensation either by acts or conduct is beyond question : Taylor’s Est., 239 Pa. 153. In this case no claim was made for commissions on income during the entire period of twenty-two years, although payments out of the receipts of the publishing business were made from time to time to members of decedent’s family entitled to them. In addition to this, the receipts and disbursements in connection with the publishing of the •newspaper were necessarily incident to the transaction of the business, for which services appellant received a stipulated salary and commissions.
Under all the circumstances, we are of opinion there was no error in refusing to allow the commissions claimed: Scull’s App., 249 Pa. 57.
The other questions raised in this appeal were not pressed at the argument.
The decree is affirmed.