Definition
An executor of an executor is the person appointed by a deceased executor's own will to administer that executor's estate, who — under the common law doctrine of transmission — steps into the shoes of the original executor and thereby becomes responsible for completing the administration of the first testator's estate as well.
The doctrine operates as follows: if A dies leaving a will and appoints B as executor, and B qualifies as executor but then dies before fully administering A's estate, having himself left a will naming C as his executor, then C becomes — by operation of law — the executor of A as well. C takes on both duties simultaneously: administering B's estate and continuing the unfinished administration of A's estate. This chain of succession can extend through multiple links, so that C's executor would similarly become executor of both B and A, and so on down the line.
The doctrine does not apply where the chain is broken. If any executor in the chain dies intestate (without a will), or without having first qualified in their own executorship, the transmission halts. In that case, administration of the original estate must pass to an administrator de bonis non — a court-appointed administrator for the goods not yet administered.
---
Common Confusion
EXECUTOR OF AN EXECUTOR vs. ADMINISTRATOR DE BONIS NON: These terms address the same gap — an estate left partially unadministered — but through entirely different mechanisms. An executor of an executor arises automatically by operation of law when the chain of testate succession remains unbroken. An administrator de bonis non is a court appointment, required precisely when that chain breaks. Researchers encountering either term in historical probate records should immediately determine whether the original executor died testate or intestate, as this controls which concept applies.
EXECUTOR OF AN EXECUTOR vs. SUCCESSOR EXECUTOR: A successor executor is appointed by the original testator's own will as an alternative or backup. An executor of an executor is not named by the original testator at all — the authority flows through a separate will belonging to a different person. The distinction matters for questions of authority, scope, and court oversight.
---
Core Elements
For the doctrine of transmission to operate, the following conditions must be met:
1. The original testator (A) must have died leaving a valid will naming an executor.
2. That executor (B) must have duly proved the will and qualified — mere nomination is insufficient.
3. B must have died testate, leaving a valid will.
4. B's executor (C) must in turn prove B's will and qualify.
5. No break in the testate chain — if any person in the chain dies intestate, the doctrine does not carry past that point.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This is a narrow but recurring doctrine in historical probate and equity practice, and researchers working in English or early American estate records will encounter it most often in Chancery proceedings and probate court filings from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Several navigational points deserve attention:
The Rapalje & Lawrence entry cross-references EXECUTOR §7, which is where the substantive treatment of the doctrine lives in that dictionary. The fragment preserved here concerns the executor's right to seek the opinion, advice, or direction of the court — a significant procedural protection under the Settled Land Acts and related equity practice. An executor of an executor held the same right to seek that judicial protection as the original executor did, provided the application was made without misrepresentation or concealment.
The citation to Shelf. R. P. Stat. 721 refers to Shelford's treatise on real property statutes, a standard nineteenth-century English authority. The Sim. 72 citation likely refers to Simons' Chancery Reports. Neither citation involves American authority, which is a flag: the doctrine of executor of an executor was well-established in English law but was unevenly adopted in American jurisdictions, many of which preferred the administrator de bonis non mechanism and enacted statutes cutting off or modifying the chain-transmission rule.
Researchers working in American sources after roughly 1850 should not assume the English doctrine applies without checking local probate statutes. The trend in American law ran toward court-supervised administration and away from automatic transmission of authority through private wills.
For corpus research purposes: the term appears with some frequency in nineteenth-century probate pleadings, equity petitions, and treatise annotations. It is almost never used in modern American practice, having been largely displaced by statute. Encountering the term in a modern context — outside academic or comparative law writing — should prompt scrutiny of the document's provenance.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Rapalje & Lawrence treat the executor of an executor under the broader EXECUTOR entry (§7), which is the standard organizational choice in nineteenth-century legal dictionaries: the concept was understood as a subcategory of executorial authority rather than a freestanding doctrine. The fragment preserved in this entry deals specifically with the court-direction protection available to such an executor under equity practice — a nuanced point suggesting that Rapalje & Lawrence's treatment was substantive rather than merely definitional.
Historical dictionaries generally agree on the core transmission rule. Where they diverge is in how much attention they pay to the American modifications. Bouvier, for instance, acknowledged the English rule but noted the growing American preference for administrator de bonis non appointments. Rapalje & Lawrence, writing for a mixed English and American audience, cite English statutory authority (Shelford) without extensive qualification, which can mislead researchers into overstating the rule's American reach.
What historical sources collectively miss: the impact of mid-to-late nineteenth-century probate reform statutes in American states, which in many jurisdictions effectively abolished the automatic transmission rule and required court appointment for any successor administration. This legislative development is underrepresented in the dictionary literature of the period.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The doctrine of transmission — the foundation of the executor-of-an-executor concept — originated in English common law and remains part of English and Commonwealth probate law. In the United States, reception of the doctrine was never uniform, and many states modified or abrogated it by statute. Researchers should verify whether the relevant jurisdiction's probate code preserves, modifies, or eliminates the chain-transmission rule before relying on historical English or early American authority.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
This entry does not have a direct encyclopedia match. For related constitutional context on executive power and removal authority, see The Removal Power — At-Will, For-Cause, and Independent Agencies (The Law Mind Constitutional Law Encyclopedia).
---