Darling v. Bennet
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
The decree of the Probate Court appealed from in this case had appointed the respondent, Bennet, guardian of the person and estate of the appellant, as a person non compos * mentis.
Read the full summary
The decree of the Probate Court appealed from in this case had appointed the respondent, Bennet, guardian of the person and estate of the appellant, as a person non compos * mentis. This decree was founded upon an inquisition made by the selectmen of the town of Middleborough, of which the appellant is an inhabitant, by virtue of a warrant issued by the judge of probate, pursuant to the provisions of the statute of 1783, c. 38, $ 3. Upon examination of witnesses, it appeared that the appellant was seventy-eight years of age; that, for a man of his years, he possessed good rational powers;…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The judge of probate was sufficiently authorized, by the inquisition of the selectmen, to make the decree which he did. But upon the facts now before us there is certainly no sufficient foundation to place the appellant under guardianship as a person non compos mentis. Perhaps it would be proper to place guardians over the children, who are causing their father to waste his estate in gratifying their vicious propensities. Further, if the appellant cannot be otherwise protected from the undue practices and impositions of his children upon him, it may yet be discreet and proper for…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Jones v. MooreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1813
- Overseers of the Poor v. GulliferSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1860
- Becton v. SelleckSupreme Court of Alabama · 1872
- H v. SSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1827
- In re Guardian for ShelleigScioto County Probate Court · 1901
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.