Case Name: RHINELANDER et al. v. SANFORD et al.
Court: United States Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1808-09
Citations: 20 F. Cas. 630
Docket Number: 
Parties: RHINELANDER et al. v. SANFORD et al.
Judges: Before LIVINGSTON, Circuit Justice, and EDWARDS, District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Cases
Volume: 20
Pages: 630–631

Head Matter:
Case No. 11,739.
RHINELANDER et al. v. SANFORD et al.
[1 Brunner, Col. Cas. 51; 3 Day, 279.]
Circuit Court, D. Connecticut.
Sept., 1808.
Practice at Lav — Appointment of Guardian ad Litem — How Made.
A motion for the appointment of a guardian to an infant party must be in writing, and must state the name of the person proposed, and his consent to be appointed.
[This was an action by Rhinelander, Harts-horne, and others against Peleg P. Sanford and others. Heard on motion to appoint a guardian.]
Mr. Bristol moved ore tenus for the appointment of a guardian to Peleg P. Sanford, one of the defendants, who was a minor.
Before LIVINGSTON, Circuit Justice, and EDWARDS, District Judge.

Opinion:
LIVINGSTON, Circuit Justice.
This motion is too loose. Whenever there is an application for the appointment of a guardian, even pro hac vice, it must be by a petition in writing, therein naming the person proposed, and stating his consent to be appointed. Motion denied.