Case ID: denio_4/html/0262-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      By the Court, Bronson, Ch. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Clarke vs. Dunham.
    
      It is not irregular to sue and recover a judgment against one who has been found by inquisition to be a lunatic or an habitual drunkard.
    The defendant was found to be an habitual drunkard in February, 1845, and a committee was appointed to take charge of his person and estate. The plaintiff afterwards commenced this action of assumpsit by the filing and service of a declaration, obtained judgment by default, and issued execution.
    
      D. Burwell, on behalf of the committee,
    moved to set aside the judgment and subsequent proceedings for irregularity. He cited 2 Paige, 422; 3 id. 199; 5 id. 489; Shelford on Lunacy, 424.
    
      J. H. Collier, contra,
    cited 19 Wend. 649.
   By the Court, Bronson, Ch. J.

We do not think the proceedings irregular. The committee should apply to the court of chancery. (Robertson v. Lain, 19 Wend. 649.)

Motion denied.