Waterman v. Wright
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an appeal from the decision of the probate court of the district of Hartford, upon a claim presented to that court, consisting of a guardian bond given to said court by one John Wright, and executed by him upon his appointment as guardian of Enoch Hovey, an insane person, and a receipt also executed by said Wright, acknowledging the receipt of the ward’s property.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from the decision of the probate court of the district of Hartford, upon a claim presented to that court, consisting of a guardian bond given to said court by one John Wright, and executed by him upon his appointment as guardian of Enoch Hovey, an insane person, and a receipt also executed by said Wright, acknowledging the receipt of the ward’s property. The claim was presented by Vernon W. Waterman, who was appointed guardian of said Hovey upon the death of said Wright in September, 1860. The plaintiff claimed that the said Wright had never in any manner accounted for the…
1Opinion of the CourtPieepoint, J.
This ease comes into this court upon exceptions to the decision of the county court, dismissing the suit for want of appellate jurisdiction.
The principal ground upon which it is claimed that the decision should be sustained, and the suit dismissed, is that, the claim which the probate court took jurisdiction of, and proceeded to adjudicate, was not a contingent claim, within the meaning of the statute which allows contingent claims to be presented to the probate court, and directs the mode of procedure thereon when so presented.
It appears from the case that the defendant, Almira W. Wright,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bailey v. BaileySupreme Court of Vermont · 1894
- Peel v. McCarthySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- In Re Miriam Thomas (Paul Thomas, Appellant)Supreme Court of Vermont · 2026
- O'Gorman v. LindekeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879