Stinson v. Leary
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Waukesha County. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion. contended that by-operation of law, a guardianship expires upon the ward’s attaining majority, and all his powers then cease. Jones v. Ward, 10 Terg.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Waukesha County. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion. contended that by-operation of law, a guardianship expires upon the ward’s attaining majority, and all his powers then cease. Jones v. Ward, 10 Terg. (Tenn.) 160; Perry's Lessee v. Brainard, 11 Ohio, 442; Hutton v. Williams, 60 Ala. 107. The intent of sec. 4032, R. S., was to relieve a guardian, etc., from giving an undertaking when acting in a fiduciary capacity for his ward or other beneficiary, and not when acting in opposition to him, and it should be construed according to that intent.
1Opinion of the CourtCole, C. J.
The appellant was cited to appear before the county court to render his account.as guardian. His ward had arrived at the age of twenty-one more than two years before the citation was issued, and no settlement of the guardian’s account had been made. On the hearing before the county court the account was examined and adjusted by that court, which adjudged that the guardian was *270indebted to bis ward in the sum of $446.91, which he was ordered to pay over to her. Being aggrieved by this order, the guardian took an appeal therefrom to the circuit court, but gave no undertaking on such appeal. The…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Paine v. JonesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
- Case v. NelsonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1898
- In re Will of SomervaillWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- In Re Methvin's GuardianshipSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Tompkins v. PageWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887