Zuckerman v. Sanitarium Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: William N. Gate ns, Judge. Department 2. While the plaintiff was a resident of Alaska, in the vicinity of Iditarod, insanity proceedings were instituted against her in the probate court for Otter Precinct, Territory of Alaska, Fourth Division, based upon which her case was brought before that court and “at a trial by jury” she appeared in person and by two attorneys appointed by the court to represent her.
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: William N. Gate ns, Judge. Department 2. While the plaintiff was a resident of Alaska, in the vicinity of Iditarod, insanity proceedings were instituted against her in the probate court for Otter Precinct, Territory of Alaska, Fourth Division, based upon which her case was brought before that court and “at a trial by jury” she appeared in person and by two attorneys appointed by the court to represent her. After the hearing the jury returned a verdict to the effect that “the said Sandford Zuekerman is really and truly insane and that she ought to be committed to the asylum or…
1Opinion of the CourtJohns, J.
1. While it is true that the court dismissed the action for “want of jurisdiction * * to hear and determine the said cause for the reason that the said cause of action should be had and maintained in the federal court and not in a state court,” and that such ruling was a technical error, the true reason was correctly given in the following statement which the court made to the jury:
“Upon the theory upon which this case was tried, it would be necessary in order for plaintiff to recover to prove that the plaintiff was never legally adjudged insane, and that there was never any legal warrant…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Douglas v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1945
- Warner v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1947