The Detroit times., 1911-01-30
|[lCEs BURDEN
UPON THE MINOR
George w. Radford Declares There
h No Authority for New Rule Of
Guardian Ad Litsm.

- ~ q the f0lt0r OF Inc Times: 80
much has appeared In your columns,
and more In the other local papers,
OF false and misleading character
rejecting upon my clients and NY
self In connection with the Hurley
estate" matter, that justice TO them
and myself requires plain statement
+ OF the facts In order TO bring out
clearly the only important question
involved, which, as viii be seen, 10
also one OF public interest.
John Hurley died interstate In May.
1892, leaving Mary A. Hurley, his
widow, and Ave minor daughters The
4 widow was appointed administrative
3 Of her husbands estate which was
settled anu closed In March, 1903, AZ
that time, Mrs. Hurleys final account
~ Administrative, was allowed, she
full, discharged and the residue OF
the estate duly assigned 90 the widow
and heirs at law pursuant 70 the
B statute. The writ represented the
administratrix as her legal adviser IN
Y the final settlement of the estate aud
Of her accounts, A full and satisfae-
& tory adjustment OF compensation for
such services was had nc the same
ume with full knowledge and APP
5 proval of the probate court Henry
Hubert, then register OF probate,
checked over said accounts, and had
\ full knowledge thereof.
From the foregoing IL will be seen
that the estate OF John Hurley, de,
& ceased, has nothing whatever 10 10
With the matters now pending.
Mrs. Hurley, shortly after her hGs'
bands death, was appointed general
< guardian of her Ave minor children,
and ever since has been and Ia now
acting as such guardian. and her
iodrth 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.
4 Hurley as attorney in connection with
such guardianship from the begin
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
under the direction of, Henry s. HUI
bert, then register of probate, and he
was familiar Herewith. The fourth
account, now in question, was filed
on Nov. 9, 1910, not pursuant TO any
order requiring Mrs. Hurley to do so,
- 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
fegister Of probate, TO be fled, and he |
was asked TO Ak the date for hearing |
anG 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 for |
Deo IL, 1910, but the court had adopt |
I'd new rule, and, instead OF adj |
yertising general guardians accounts |
% before, 1t was now appointing |
guardians nd Item TO examine them;
mat he supposed that course would
be pursued in this instance, but would !
consult the Judge and ascertain his
decision.
On Nov 10. 1910. the writer was |
Duf1eld that he had been appointed |
Item to represent the minors In the |
netlement of their mothers account |
~ general guardian.
On Dec 80, 1910, Mrs. Hurley and |
the Oldest three Of her daughters, who |
had become of age prior to the filing |
Of the account and who had consent
ed to the allowance thereof by writ |
ten endorsement thereon, presented a |
motion to set aside the appointment |
Of the guardian id Item, the principal |
Erounds OF which were, that the pro- !
r bale court was without Jurisdiction to !
& appoint guardian ad Item to ex- |
anime and pass upon general |
guardians account instead OF adver- /
ustng and hearing thereof by the |
court: that the court had no power |
10 Impose the expense OF a guardian |
I'D Item on the minors estate; that |
the appointment was irregular In that |
u had been made without notice to |
any one and no reason had been as |
signed therefor; that the Oldest three |
daughters, who were OF age, had con |
4 eented to the allowance OF the ac- |
s count, and had settled with their |
guardian and therefore the appoint |
ment could not apply TO them under !
the law; that the two minors were OF
ule age OF twenty and eighteen years
respectively, that they had examined
ard were familiar with the account
nne asked to have II allowed; their
Rsidayits were attached TO the mo.
Non. No one else had, or could have.
any interest in the matter.
This motion was argued before
Judge Hubert on Dec. 81, 1910, and
3 denied by him on that day for the
icaeon then stated by him that the
court had adopted the practice Of APP.
4 - -