The intestate left two sons, Robert A. King and Lindley King, each of whom petitioned the Register of Wills of Lancaster County for letters of administration on their father’s estate, and to each letters were refused. From the decision denying letters to him Lindley has brought this appeal.
Clause (c) of section 1 of the Act of May 13, 1925, P. L. 598, provides: “Whenever letters of administration are by law necessary, the register having jurisdiction shall grant them in such form as the case shall require to the surviving spouse, if any, of the decedent, or to such of his or her relations or kindred as by law may be entitled to the residue of his or her personal estate, or to a share or shares therein. . . .”
There is no surviving spouse. The appellant is entitled to a share in the residue of the estate and is in the nearest degree of consanguinity with the decedent. The law prefers him, and the register exceeded his discretionary power in denying him the right to administer the estate unless he is incompetent, and there is no evidence of anything which reflects on his competency. The naked facts, as here, that a son had farmed for his father on the shares does not adversely affect competency. To predicate incompetency to a son because of such a relationship seems to be a perversion of the statute. To say that a son who, from his habits and experience, is exceptionally qualified to administer an estate shall be denied that privilege solely for the reason that he had farmed for the intestate would not be consistent with the purpose of the act, which does not contemplate the impeaching of the family’s
The appeal is sustained and the Register of Wills is directed to issue letters of administration on the estate of Alvin King to Lindley King.
Prom George Ross Eshleman, Lancaster Pa.