In re Perkins
New York Court of Chancery
PETITION of Jonathan Perkins, stating that Daniel Perkins, now of Bridgewater, in Massachusetts, had been there duly found, by inquisition, a lunatic, and that the petitioner had, by the competent authority in that state, been appointed guardian of the person and estate of the lunatic.
Read the full summary
PETITION of Jonathan Perkins, stating that Daniel Perkins, now of Bridgewater, in Massachusetts, had been there duly found, by inquisition, a lunatic, and that the petitioner had, by the competent authority in that state, been appointed guardian of the person and estate of the lunatic. That the lunatic had no property, except about 70 acres of land lying in Madison county, in this state, and worth about 1,000 dollars, and that the same yielded very insufficient rents and profits; and that it was necessary, and he, therefore, prayed, that the same might be sold for the expense and maintenance…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
It is necessary that a commission of lunacy issue here; the inquisition abroad was not sufficient to authorize a sale of the real estate. (1 Schoales & Lefroy, 307.) The powers given by the statute (sess. 24. ch. 30.) apply only to cases arising under the authority of this Court. Perhaps the inquisition in Massachusetts may be sufficient ground or evidence to warrant the inquisition here, according to what was said in Gillam’s case, (2 Vesey, jun. 587.) It is, at least, sufficient to warrant the issuing a commission; and there is no doubt, from the case ex parte Southcote,…
2Cited by9 opinions
- East End Trust Co. v. OttenNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- In re the Guardianship of SallWashington Supreme Court · 1910
- In re KasslerNew York Supreme Court · 1940
- Seitz Estates, Inc. v. SeitzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1929
- In re the Appointment of a Committee of the Property of RyanNew York Supreme Court · 1943
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.