Case ID: nh_59/html/0149-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Bingham, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Pettes v. Upham.
    Under Gen. Laws, c. 184, s. 6, the revocation of a guardianship, the personal cause of which has ceased, is not prevented by a pending process of settling the ward’s estate in the insolvent course, under Gen. Laws, c. 186, s. 10.
    Probate appeal.
    
      Woodward, for the plaintiff.
    
      Lane, for the creditors.
   Bingham, J.

The plaintiff is under guardianship as a spendthrift. Upon his petition for revocation, the probate court found, that the cause for guardianship had ceased; but his petition was denied, on the ground that his creditors’ rights might be injuriously-affected by a revocation before the completion of the pending-process of settling his estate in the insolvent course, under Gen. Laws, e. 186, s. 10. Without undertaking to determine what effect, if any, a revocation will have upon that process, or upon the rights-of his creditors, we are of the opinion that he is entitled to personal freedom and a decree of revocation.

Decree reversed.

All concurred.