Harris v. Harris
Supreme Court of Vermont
ACTION op ACCount. The question of defendant’s liability to account was submitted to the court upon the following statement of facts: On the 12th day of April, 1866, the plaintiff, then being a minor, made choice of the defendant as his guardian, and on the same day the latter was duly appointed such guardian by the probate court for the district of Addison.
Read the full summary
ACTION op ACCount. The question of defendant’s liability to account was submitted to the court upon the following statement of facts: On the 12th day of April, 1866, the plaintiff, then being a minor, made choice of the defendant as his guardian, and on the same day the latter was duly appointed such guardian by the probate court for the district of Addison. The defendant accepted the appointment, and filed in said probate court a bond in' the usual form in $2,000, with one Loren C. Mead as surety. On the 20th day of May, 1866, said defendant, as such guardiau, filed an inventory showing…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Ross, J.
The question arising upon the agreed facts is, whether the county court had jurisdiction of the subject matter involved. In Field et ux. v. Torrey, 7 Vt., 372, the court held that a guardian, by continuing to hold the property of the ward after tho termination of the guardianship, made himself bailiff of the ward’s property for the time which he continued thus to hold it, and was liable to account for the same in the common law action of account; that the probate court had no jurisdiction over such an accounting, and if the ward chose, he could…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Probate Court v. SlasonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1851
- Field v. TorreySupreme Court of Vermont · 1835
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bailey v. BaileySupreme Court of Vermont · 1894