In re Hallock

New York Court of Chancery

In re Hallock

7 Johns. Ch. 24

DecidedJuly 1, 1823

StatusPublished

This text of 7 Johns. Ch. 24 (In re Hallock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Hallock, 7 Johns. Ch. 24 (N.Y. 1823).

Pincite

Opinion

The Chancellor

said, the order heretofore granted, was agreeable to the practice in the case of Creagh, a lunatic, (1 Ball & Beatty, 108.) and according to a decision by Lord Redesdale, there referred to, in which an order was granted without bill, upon the petition of the committee, to restrain waste upon the lunatic’s estate. That such an authority is necessarily included in the power given by statute, (1 N. R. L. 147.) “That the Chancellor shall have the care, and provide for the safe keeping of all idiots and lunatics, and of their real and personal estates; and shall take care that the same be not wasted or destroyed.”

Motion granted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The Chancellor

said, the order heretofore granted, was agreeable to the practice in the case of Creagh, a lunatic, (1 Ball & Beatty, 108.) and according to a decision by Lord Redesdale, there referred to, in which an order was granted without bill, upon the petition of the committee, to restrain waste upon the lunatic’s estate. That such an authority is necessarily included in the power given by statute, (1 N. R. L. 147.) “That the Chancellor shall have the care, and provide for the safe keeping of all idiots and lunatics, and of their real and personal estates; and shall take care that the same be not wasted or destroyed.”

Motion granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 Johns. Ch. 24, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-hallock-nychanct-1823.