MacKewan v. Elliott

Court of Chancery of South Carolina

MacKewan v. Elliott

6 Rec. Co. Ch. (S.C.) 534

Court of Chancery of South Carolina·Decided July 11, 1764·Published

Opinion

On Motion of Mr. Rutledge being of Counsel with the Defendants al-ledging that the Defendant Mary Bellinger Elliott being served with Process [535]*535to appear and answer the Plaintiffs Bill hath appeared thereto, but being an Infant under the Age of Twenty One Years cannot answer- the same without having a Guardian assigned for that Purpose, It is Ordered that Mr. Charles Elliott the other Defendant be, and he is hereby assigned and appointed Guardian to the said Infant by whom She may answer and defend this Suit.

J ohn T roup, Register in Chancery

Turn over to Page 236.

Brought forward from Page 179.

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

On Motion of Mr. Rutledge being of Counsel with the Defendants al-ledging that the Defendant Mary Bellinger Elliott being served with Process [535]*535to appear and answer the Plaintiffs Bill hath appeared thereto, but being an Infant under the Age of Twenty One Years cannot answer- the same without having a Guardian assigned for that Purpose, It is Ordered that Mr. Charles Elliott the other Defendant be, and he is hereby assigned and appointed Guardian to the said Infant by whom She may answer and defend this Suit.

J ohn T roup, Register in Chancery

Turn over to Page 236.

Brought forward from Page 179.

MacKewan v. Elliott, 6 Rec. Co. Ch. (S.C.) 534 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1764).

Pincite

6 Rec. Co. Ch. (S.C.) 534 (MacKewan v. Elliott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.