Case ID: f-cas_20/html/0630-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LIVINGSTON, Circuit Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Case No. 11,739.
    RHINELANDER et al. v. SANFORD et al.
    [1 Brunner, Col. Cas. 51;  3 Day, 279.]
    Circuit Court, D. Connecticut.
    Sept., 1808.
    Practice at Lav — Appointment of Guardian ad Litem — How Made.
    A motion for the appointment of a guardian to an infant party must be in writing, and must state the name of the person proposed, and his consent to be appointed.
    [This was an action by Rhinelander, Harts-horne, and others against Peleg P. Sanford and others. Heard on motion to appoint a guardian.]
    
      Mr. Bristol moved ore tenus for the appointment of a guardian to Peleg P. Sanford, one of the defendants, who was a minor.
    Before LIVINGSTON, Circuit Justice, and EDWARDS, District Judge.
   LIVINGSTON, Circuit Justice.

This motion is too loose. Whenever there is an application for the appointment of a guardian, even pro hac vice, it must be by a petition in writing, therein naming the person proposed, and stating his consent to be appointed. Motion denied.