Case No. 11,739.

RHINELANDER et al. v. SANFORD et al.

[1 Brunner, Col. Cas. 51;¹ 3 Day, 279.]

Circuit Court, D. Connecticut.

Sept., 1808.

PRACTICE AT LAW—APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM—HOW MADE.

A motion for the appointment of a guardian to an infant party must be in writing, and must state the name of the person proposed, and his consent to be appointed.

[This was an action by Rhinelander, Hartshorne, and others against Peleg P. Sanford and others. Heard on motion to appoint a guardian.]

Mr. Bristol moved ore tenus for the appointment of a guardian to Peleg P. Sanford, one of the defendants, who was a minor.

Before LIVINGSTON, Circuit Justice, and EDWABDS, District Judge.

LIVINGSTON, Circuit Justice. This motion is too loose. Whenever there is an application for the appointment of a guardian, even pro hac vice, it must he by a petition in writing, therein naming the person proposed, and stating his consent to be appointed. Motion denied.

¹ [Reported by Albert Brunner, Esq., and here reprinted by permission.]

This volume of American Law was transcribed for use on the Internet
through a contribution from Google.