Case Name: John Wallace and Franklin Allen, as Committee of Marie F. Wilmerding, Plaintiffs, v. Rose Frey et al., Defendants; Same, Plaintiffs, v. Rose Frey, The United States Trust Company et al., Defendants; Same, Plaintiffs, v. Rose Frey and The Mount Morris Bank, Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1899-03
Citations: 27 Misc. 29
Docket Number: 
Parties: John Wallace and Franklin Allen, as Committee of Marie F. Wilmerding, Plaintiffs, v. Rose Frey et al., Defendants. Same, Plaintiffs, v. Rose Frey, The United States Trust Company et al., Defendants. Same, Plaintiffs, v. Rose Frey and The Mount Morris Bank, Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 27
Pages: 29–29

Head Matter:
John Wallace and Franklin Allen, as Committee of Marie F. Wilmerding, Plaintiffs, v. Rose Frey et al., Defendants. Same, Plaintiffs, v. Rose Frey, The United States Trust Company et al., Defendants. Same, Plaintiffs, v. Rose Frey and The Mount Morris Bank, Defendants.
(Supreme Court, New York Special Term,
March, 1899.)
Lunatics — While the inquisition is in force, a settlement made with a lunatic is void and cannot be pleaded.
The transferee of an adjudged lunatic will not be permitted to interpose, in actions brought by her committee to set aside said transfers, supplemental answers which allege a settlement entered into by the transferee with the lunatic pending the action and while the inquisition continued. Such a defense must be deemed frivolous as," during the life of the inquisition, the presumption .of insanity is conclusive.
Motion by the defendant Eose Frey for leave to serve a supplemental answer in each of these actions, setting np a defense, the nature of which is stated in the opinion.
James C. De La Mare, for motion.
John B. Gleason, opposed.

Opinion:
Giegerich, J.
These actions are brought by the committee of an adjudged lunatic to set aside- certain transfers made by the latter to the defendant Eose Frey, who applies for leave to set up by supplemental answer a settlement entered into by her with the lunatic during the pendency of the action, and while the inquisition remained in force, as it still continues.
The defense must be viewed as frivolous, since the presumption of insanity, during the life of the inquisition, is conclusive, and the actual sanity of the adjudged incompetent cannot be shown in support of an agreement made during that period. Carter v. Beckwith, 128 N. Y. 312.
Therefore, the motion is denied, with $10 costs.
Motion denied, with $10 costs.