The Detroit times., 1911-01-31
|[ICEs BURDEN
UPON THE MINOR
George W. Radford Declares There
4 No Authority for New Rule Of
Guardian Ad Litem.

much has appeared in your columns,
and more In the other local papers.
Of false and misleading character
s rejecting upon my clients and NY
self In connection with the Hurley
estate" matter, that justice 10 then
ant myself requires plain statement
OF the facts In order TO bring out
. CLEARLY the only important question
involved, which, as will be seen, ID
4 also one Of public interest
A John Hurley died intestate In May.
1892. leaving Mary A. Hurley, his
widow, and five minor daughters. The
widow was appointed administrators
OF her husbands estate. which was
x settIed and closed in March, 1903. Al
that time, Mrs. Hurley's final account
as Administered was allowed, she
fully discharged and the residue OF
the estate duly assigned TO the widow
and heirs at law pursuant TO the
statute The writ represented tie
enthusiastically as her legal adviser IN
the final settlement of the estate and
5 OF her accounts. A full and satisfac-
tory adjustment of compensation Tor
such services was had at the same
time with full knowledge and an
proval OF the probate court. Henry
Il. -. l1uiDtTls lucu ItSlblSI VI piOpoNNs
shocked over said accounts, and had
flilI knowledge thereof.
From the foregoing IL will be seen
that the estate or John Hurley. de-
X ceased, has nothing whatever TO 80
4 With the matters now pending.
Mrs. Hurley, shortly after her hus-
hands death, was appointed general
guardian of her five minor children,
aud ever since has been and is now
acting as such guardian, and her
4, foarth account as such general guar
dian Is now pending before the pro
hate court. IL is in relation To this
account that so much has appeared In
the press of late.
The writer has represented Mrs.
8 Hurley as attorney in connection with
sdct guardianship from the begiu-
ming; has prepared all of said ac-
counts and has attended to the allow
ance thereof before the court. The
first three accounts, pursuant TO the
practice then prevailing in the pro
bate court, were advertised for hear
ing, and checked over either by, or
y under the direction of, Henry 8. HUI
bert, then register OF probate, and he
was familiar Herewith. The fourth
account, now in question, was filed
On Nov. 8, 1910, not pursuant to any
order requiring Mrs. Hurley to do so,
as stated in the press, but in per-
Torrance of her duty and Of her own
notion.
When the writer's assistant handed
The account to Albert W. Flint, now
register of probate, to be fled. and he
was asked to fix the date for hearing
4 anL have the same advertised. pur-
suant to the usual practice and the
statute of this state, Mr.. Flint stated
that the hearing would be set Tor
Dec. 13, 1910, but the court had adopt
cd new rule, and, instead of adj.
vertising general guardians accounts
rs before, II was now appointing
guardians ad Item TO examine them:
that he supposed that course would
be pursued in this instance, bit wolld
consult the Judge and ascertain his
decision ,.a....-, 49,.
On Nov. Is, 1910. the writer was
& advised by letter from Mr.. DIVE 3.
Dufileld that he had been appointed
by the court to act as guardian ad
Item to represent the minors in the
settlement OF their mothers account
as general guardian. 80 ,- - "a
S. Or Dec. 80, 1910, Mrs. Hurley and
the oldest three OF her daughters, who
had become OF age prior to the fling
OF the account and who had consent.
cd to the allowance thereof by writ
ten endorsement thereon, presented
:. motion TO set aside the appointment
, Of the guardian ad Item, the principal
grounds OF which were, that the pro-
Z bate court was without Jurisdiction to
appoint n guardian ad Item to ex.
anime and pass upon a general
guardians account instead of adver-.
4 Using and hearing thereof by the
court: that the court had no power
10 impose the expense of q guardian
ed Item on the minors estate: that
the appointment was irregular in that
II lad been made without notice 10
any one and no reason had been as
signed therefor: that the oldest three
daughters, who were OF age, had con
H fented to the allowance OF the ac-
count, and had settled with their
Guardian and therefore the appoint.
ment could not apply to them under
She law; that the two minors were of
Che age oil twenty and eighteen years
RESPECTIVELY, that they had examined
ard were familiar with the account
q anG asked to have IL allowed: their
etiidayits were attached TO the mo.
lion. No one else had, or could have.
any interest in the matter.
81 I'nis motion was argued before
Judge Hubert on Dec. 81, 1910. and
denied by him on that day for the
reason then stated by him that the
Court had adopted the practice of ap-