Melanefy v. O'Driscoll

41 N.E. 654, 164 Mass. 422, 1895 Mass. LEXIS 258
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided October 17, 1895·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Allen, J.

Even if it were assumed that a widowed mother is under the same obligation to support her minor children as a father would be, an allowance may nevertheless be made to her towards such support from the estate of a child who has property; and if she herself were the guardian, such allowance might be made in the settlement of her accounts. Dawes v. Howard, 4 Mass. 97. In this instance, another person was appointed guardian; and the reasonableness of his payments to his ward’s mother may be determined on his accounting. It is a question of fact, and has been found in his favor, provided such finding was warranted upon the evidence. It was not necessary to obtain an order of court before making the payments. The amount of property of the mother is not stated. Upon the facts reported, we cannot say that the allowance was unreasonable. The appellant suggests that the mother did not originally intend to charge anything against her daughter. But this does not so appear by the report. Decree affirmed.

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

Melanefy v. O'Driscoll, 41 N.E. 654, 164 Mass. 422, 1895 Mass. LEXIS 258 (Mass. 1895).

41 N.E. 654 (Melanefy v. O'Driscoll) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Moran v. Desmond
351 N.E.2d 214 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1976)
Ayer v. Commissioner
45 B.T.A. 146 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1941)
Probate Court of Providence v. Higgins
191 A. 260 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1937)
L. P. Hollander Co. v. Porter
166 N.E. 724 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1929)
McGeary v. McGeary
181 Mass. 539 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1902)
Ellis v. Soper
82 N.W. 1041 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1900)