In re Lasher
New York Court of Chancery
This was an application for a new commission of lunacy, to enquire as to the soundness of mind of C. Lasher. A commission had been issued, and executed, in which the jury found she was not a lunatic. But the commissioners all certified that, from the testimony adduced on the execution of the commission, as well as upon personal examination and inspection, they had no doubt she was a lunatic and of unsound mind, so as to be incapable of governing herself or managing property.
Read the full summary
This was an application for a new commission of lunacy, to enquire as to the soundness of mind of C. Lasher. A commission had been issued, and executed, in which the jury found she was not a lunatic. But the commissioners all certified that, from the testimony adduced on the execution of the commission, as well as upon personal examination and inspection, they had no doubt she was a lunatic and of unsound mind, so as to be incapable of governing herself or managing property. They also returned all the evidence taken before them and the jury. And one of the commisssioners, who was a physician,…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
There is no irregularity, or defective finding of the jury in this case. And the only questions for consideration are whether the court has the power to award a new commission; and if so, whether this is a proper case fot the exercise of the power.
*98In the case Ex parte Glen, (4 Dess. Rep. 546,) the court of chancery in South Carolina refused an application for a new commission, to enquire of the lunacy, upon the merits. But it appears to have been taken for granted that the court had the power to direct a new commission to be issued, in a proper case, although the jury had…
2Cited by1 opinion
- In re LewisNew York Supreme Court · 1908