McConnell v. Adams

The Superior Court of New York City

McConnell v. Adams

3 Sandf. 728

CourtThe Superior Court of New York City

DecidedApril 5, 1851

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Sandf. 728 (McConnell v. Adams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McConnell v. Adams, 3 Sandf. 728 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1851).

Pincite

Opinion

Sandford, J.,

with the concurrence of two of his associates, held that the appointment was properly made. That the provision in section 116 of the code, was .intended for the benefit and protection of the infant, to secure him the opportunity of having a guardian of his own selection, by giving him twenty days after the service of the summons, in which no other person could apply. After that time, the plaintiff, or any relative or friend of the infant might make the application, but the infant was still at liberty to apply himself, until forestalled by such application.

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

Sandford, J.,

with the concurrence of two of his associates, held that the appointment was properly made. That the provision in section 116 of the code, was .intended for the benefit and protection of the infant, to secure him the opportunity of having a guardian of his own selection, by giving him twenty days after the service of the summons, in which no other person could apply. After that time, the plaintiff, or any relative or friend of the infant might make the application, but the infant was still at liberty to apply himself, until forestalled by such application.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Sandf. 728, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcconnell-v-adams-nysuperctnyc-1851.