In re Tracy
New York Court of Chancery
Some time during the last winter a commission in the nature of a writ de lunático inquirendo was issued, upon which Anson Tracy was found to be incapable of conducting his affairs in consequence of habitual drunkenness.
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor said it was the privilege of a party against whom a commission of lunacy is issued to have notice, and to be present at its execution. That if there were any peculiar circumstances in the case which rendered it improper or unsafe to give notice to the party, as in some cases of furious madness, the facts should be stated in the application to the court, so that a provision might be inserted in the commission dispensing with the necessity of *582notice. That as the proceedings were irregular in this respect, Tracy must have an opportunity to be heard and to pro¿UGe his witnesses…
2Cited by27 opinions
- Sporza v. . German Savings BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- Carter v. . BeckwithNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Lopez v. . CampbellNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Matter of BlewittNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- In Re the Guardianship of WardHawaii Supreme Court · 1951
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.