Case Name: In the Matter of the Application for the Appointment of a Committee of the Person and Property of Henry Spaulding Schley, Sr., an Alleged Incompetent Person. Arline Bennett Schley; John J. Fogarty, Special Guardian for Henry Spaulding Schley, Sr., an Alleged Incompetent Person, and Ray W. Aylesworth, Special Guardian for "John" Schley, Diane Mason Schley, and Henry Spaulding Schley, 3rd, Infants, etc., Appellants; Adele Mason Schley, Sturgess Mason Schley, Henry S. Schley, Jr., Katherine Schley Variell, Farmers Loan and Trust Company, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1938-01-10
Citations: 253 A.D. 818
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Application for the Appointment of a Committee of the Person and Property of Henry Spaulding Schley, Sr., an Alleged Incompetent Person. Arline Bennett Schley; John J. Fogarty, Special Guardian for Henry Spaulding Schley, Sr., an Alleged Incompetent Person, and Ray W. Aylesworth, Special Guardian for “John” Schley, Diane Mason Schley, and Henry Spaulding Schley, 3rd, Infants, etc., Appellants; Adele Mason Schley, Sturgess Mason Schley, Henry S. Schley, Jr., Katherine Schley Variell, Farmers Loan and Trust Company, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 253
Pages: 818–818

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Application for the Appointment of a Committee of the Person and Property of Henry Spaulding Schley, Sr., an Alleged Incompetent Person. Arline Bennett Schley; John J. Fogarty, Special Guardian for Henry Spaulding Schley, Sr., an Alleged Incompetent Person, and Ray W. Aylesworth, Special Guardian for “John” Schley, Diane Mason Schley, and Henry Spaulding Schley, 3rd, Infants, etc., Appellants; Adele Mason Schley, Sturgess Mason Schley, Henry S. Schley, Jr., Katherine Schley Variell, Farmers Loan and Trust Company, Respondents.

Opinion:
In a proceeding for the appointment of a committee for the person and property of an alleged incompetent person, order dismissing the petition reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, payable out of the estate, and the proceeding transferred to the Supreme Court, Nassau county, for determination on the merits. The sole issue before the court was whether the alleged incompetent resided in Westchester county or in Nassau county. Although the alleged incompetent has for thirteen years been an inmate of a hospital in Westchester county, his home was and is in Nassau county. " Residence " is synonymous with " domicile." (Hislop v. Taaffe, 141 App. Div. 40.) The court, therefore, properly decided that the alleged incompetent's residence is in the Second Judicial District. The court, however, erred in dismissing the petition, since on the issue of incompetency the petitioner is entitled to her day in court. Hagarty, Carswell, Davis, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.