History
  • No items yet
midpage
In re Perkins
2 Johns. Ch. 124
New York Court of Chancery
1816
Check Treatment
The Chancellor.

It is necessary that a commission of lunacy issue here; the inquisition abroad was not sufficient to authorize a sale of the real estate. (1 Schoales & Lefroy, 307.) The powers given by the statute (sess. 24. ch. 30.) apply only to cases arising under the authority of this Court. Perhaps the inquisition in Massachusetts may be sufficient ground or evidence to warrant the inquisition here, according to what was said in Gillam’s case, (2 Vesey, jun. 587.) It is, at least, sufficient to warrant the issuing a commission; and there is no doubt, from the case ex parte Southcote, (Amb. 109.) that a commission of lunacy may issue against a person resident abroad.

[ * 125 ]

A commission was, accordingly, issued, and was executed at Albany, and the petitioner appointed committee of the *person and estate of the lunatic, on giving security to the value of the real estáte in the county of Madison, and he was afterwards, by an order of the Court, founded on petition and affidavit, authorized to sell the real estate, and directed to invest the proceeds, &c. for the maintenance of the lunatic.

Case Details

Case Name: In re Perkins
Court Name: New York Court of Chancery
Date Published: Feb 8, 1816
Citation: 2 Johns. Ch. 124
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.