Smith v. Keteltas

It was held in Soverhill v. Dickson, 5 How. Pr. 109, that an action could ncjt be brought against a lunatic, for whom a committee had been appointed, without an application to this court, although the third subdivision of section 134 of the Oode of Procedure provided for the service of a summons upon the committee of the lunatic and upon the lunatic personally'. To the same effect is Matter of Delahunty, 28 Abb. 1ST. O. 245, decided in. 1892 by the General Term of the first department. “It has been supposed,” said Judge Welles, in Soverhill v. Dickson, “ that section 134 of the…