State Ex Rel. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co. v. Parker

167 S.E. 495, 204 N.C. 54, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 320
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 25, 1933·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Stagy, C. J.

The rule, generally accordant with the decisions, is that, jurisdiction to appoint a successor to a guardian ordinarily resides with the court making the original appointment, though the residence of the ward may have been changed in the meantime. 28 O. J., 1109. Especially is this so, where, as here, suit against the original guardian and his surety is necessary to obtain a settlement. 15 A. & E. Enc. of Law, 35 and 120.

Nor are our own decisions contrariwise. Credle v. Baugham, 152 N. C., 18, 67 S. E., 46.

Affirmed.

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

State Ex Rel. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co. v. Parker, 167 S.E. 495, 204 N.C. 54, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 320 (N.C. 1933).

167 S.E. 495 (State Ex Rel. North Carolina Bank & Trust Co. v. Parker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hines v. Gaddis
120 P.2d 849 (Washington Supreme Court, 1942)