Brown v. Chadwick
| Decision Date | 31 October 1883 |
| Citation | 79 Mo. 587 |
| Parties | BROWN v. CHADWICK, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Adair Circuit Court.--HON. ANDREW ELLISON, Judge.
REVERSED
O. D. Jones and James Ellison for appellant
W. W. Cover for respondent.
The appellant was declared to be insane by the probate court of Knox county, and the respondent was appointed the guardian of his person and estate. Afterward, upon a proceeding in the same court, he was declared sane and of sound mind, and the guardian, Brown, was ordered to make a final settlement and turn over the surplus in his hands to his ward. Afterward, the said Brown presented his final settlement to the said probate court, and, as the record shows, he and his attorney and the said Chadwick and his attorney were present in court, examined the settlement, and the court also examined the settlement, which showed a balance due the guardian, for moneys paid out, of $145; whereupon the record shows the court approved the settlement and discharged the guardian. The record also shows that the said Chadwick was then present in his own proper person, having been previously adjudged to be restored to his right mind. The settlement shows that the guardian had turned over to his restored ward $1,492, as the balance of the estate in his hands unexpended. The respondent thereupon commenced suit in the circuit court of Knox county on this final settlement to recover of Chadwick the $145 so found to be due him. The venue of the case was taken to Adair, where there was judgment for Brown, and the appellant brings the case here.
The case was tried and disposed of upon the theory that this was a final judgment of a court of record unreversed and could not be collaterally attacked. The answer pleaded no jurisdiction in the probate court over the alleged insane man, because no notice was given him, but the record offered in evidence shows that upon the trial of the question of insanity “the parties appearing and declaring themselves ready for trial, the cause is submitted, evidence adduced before the jury, who after argument of counsel,” etc. The answer admits the settlement, but denies the legality of the guardianship; puts in issue the legality of all the proceedings of the probate court and the guardian's proceedings thereunder. Upon the trial the plaintiff offered in evidence the record of the proceedings of the probate court declaring appellant insane, also of the final settlement, etc., which was objected to by the defendant for want of jurisdiction; for want of power to render a judgment against the appellant; “because the petition does not state...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Title Guaranty & Surety Co. v. State of Missouri
...beyond what he owes." The declaration so limited is supported by Wyatt v. Woods, 31 Mo. 351; Frost v. Winston, 32 Mo. 489, and Brown v. Chadwick, 79 Mo. 587. It is clear upon the whole record that no just credit or offset was denied the defendants and that no prejudice was occasioned them b......
-
Sidwell v. Kaster
...so shows, and it may be attacked collaterally. Fogle v. Kaster, 212 S.W. (Mo. App.) 565; Johnson v. Kaster, 199 Mo.App. 501; Brown v. Chadwick, 79 Mo. 587; Moody Peyton, 135 Mo. 491; Black v. Black, 34 Pa. St. 354; Chandler v. Dodson, 52 Mo. 130; Art. 6, sec. 34, Mo. Constitution; Sec. 4056......
-
Sidwell v. Kaster
...of an insane person cannot be made a personal judgment against such person when restored to sanity. Johnson v. Ka s ter, supra; Brown v. Chadwick, 79 Mo. 587. The judgment is As we interpret the language of the learned court, it rules that the petition stated no cause of action, because the......
-
Johnson v. Castor
...the estate of an insane person a personal judgment against such person when restored to sanity. We think it cannot be done. Brown v. Chadwick, 79 Mo. 587. An allowance or judgment in the probate court is of the nature of a judgment in rem, that is to say, it is against the estate (Moody v. ......