Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

WADLEIGH v. EATON.

A ward may be allowed an appeal from a probate decree, denying his petition for a revocation of his guardianship, when he was prevented from appealing through the misfortune of being unable to furnish an appeal bond, having no means to indemnify sureties, his property being in the hands of his guardian.

BINGHAM, J.

Any person aggrieved by any probate decision, who was prevented from appealing within sixty days, through mistake, accident, or misfortune, and not from his own neglect, may be allowed an appeal. G.L., c. 207, s. 7. The law having placed the plaintiff's property under the control of her guardian, she was unable to give a bond, with sufficient sureties, as required by Gen. Laws, c. 207, s. 3. This was a misfortune. The court may exercise its discretion as to requiring the plaintiff to furnish security for costs. G.L., c. 207, s. 10. She will not be ordered to do so at this time. The defendant has her property in his hands, and if he is finally entitled to costs they can be adjusted in the settlement of his account.

Appeal allowed.

All concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WADLEIGH v. EATON
(Jun 1, 1880)