Morey's Appeal

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Morey's Appeal

57 N.H. 54, 1876 N.H. LEXIS 52

DecidedMarch 22, 1876

StatusPublished

This text of 57 N.H. 54 (Morey's Appeal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Morey's Appeal, 57 N.H. 54, 1876 N.H. LEXIS 52 (N.H. 1876).

Pincite

Opinion

Cushing, C. J.

The petition assigned as a reason for the appointment of a guardian, that the appellant was a spendthrift; but the auditor reports that no evidence was offered tending to show that the appellant was a spendthrift, within the statutory meaning of the term. Whether the facts offered to be proved would under any other form of petition justify the appointment of a guardian, need not be considered. It is sufficient for the purposes of this case that the evidence did not tend to sustain the petition, and therefore the decree must be reversed.

Ladd and Smith, JJ., concurred.

Decree of probate court reversed.

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

Cushing, C. J.

The petition assigned as a reason for the appointment of a guardian, that the appellant was a spendthrift; but the auditor reports that no evidence was offered tending to show that the appellant was a spendthrift, within the statutory meaning of the term. Whether the facts offered to be proved would under any other form of petition justify the appointment of a guardian, need not be considered. It is sufficient for the purposes of this case that the evidence did not tend to sustain the petition, and therefore the decree must be reversed.

Ladd and Smith, JJ., concurred.

Decree of probate court reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 N.H. 54, 1876 N.H. LEXIS 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moreys-appeal-nh-1876.