#### Carrie Tintel et al., Appellees, v. A. W. Gorke, Appellant.

Gen. No. 22,771.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

Executors and administratobs, § 633 * —when heirs and next of Mn may sue on debt. In an action to recover for goods sold and delivered, where the declaration alleged that the plaintiffs were the heirs and next of kin of the seller of such goods; that he died prior to the commencement of the action; that his estate was completely administered in a foreign State, where he died; that his administratrix, one of the plaintiffs, had paid all his debts, and the balance of his estate, including the claim sued on, had been distributed among the plaintiffs as his only heirs at law and next of kin, and that the estate was thereupon closed and such administratrix discharged, prior to the commencement of the action, held that the plaintiffs were the proper parties to bring sufih action.

Appeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. J. J. Cooke, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed March 26, 1917.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Carrie Tintel, Mary A. Kantb, Minnie B. Eisner, Anna Tintel, Emma A. Tintel and Birdie Tin-tel, plaintiffs, against A. M. Gorke, defendant, to recover as heirs of C. H. Tintel, deceased, for goods sold and delivered by the deceased to the defendant. From a judgment for plaintiffs for $244.65, on demurrer to the declaration, defendant appeals.

Martin W. Grosse, for appellant.

Krembr & Greenfield, for appellees; Robert Branard, Jr., of counsel.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.