Lawbaugh v. Sweeney

242 A.D. 500, 275 N.Y.S. 869, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6105
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Lawbaugh v. Sweeney. Read the opinion of the Court — 237 A.D. 788

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The record does not disclose that Annie E. Hawkins, the incompetent, was served with process as a defendant in the action or that she appeared therein. There was, therefore, no necessity for the appointment of a special guardian for her.

The order so far as appealed from should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion in said respect denied, with leave to the respondents to renew the motion upon proof that the incompetent was served with process or appeared in the action.

Present — Finch, P. J., Merrell, Martin, O’Malley and Untermyer, JJ.

Order so far as appealed from reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with leave to the respondents to renew the motion upon proof that the incompetent was served with process or appeared in the action.

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

Lawbaugh v. Sweeney, 242 A.D. 500, 275 N.Y.S. 869, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6105 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

242 A.D. 500 (Lawbaugh v. Sweeney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.