Court Opinion

ID: 9812813
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 22:48:48.047407+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:26:42.155127
License: Public Domain

CoNnob, J.,
dissenting: After a full hearing of this cause, and a careful consideration of all the matters presented by the guardians of the infant, in support of their respective contentions as to the best interest, financial and otherwise, of their ward, with respect to the matters and things referred to in the petition of the Cabarrus Bank and Trust Company, one of the guardians, and in the response and counter-petition of Mrs. Annie L. Cannon, the other guardian, Judge War lick found:
“1. That it is not for the best interest of said infant, under the existing conditions, that the prayer of the petition of the Cabarrus Bank and Trust Company, guardian of Anne Cannon Reynolds II, be allowed, authorizing and instructing it to make a motion in the proceeding in Forsyth County referred to in said petition to set aside the decree entered therein.
■“2. That it is for the best interest of said infant, Anne Cannon Reynolds II, that the tentative proposition set out by Mrs. Annie L. Cannon, guardian, in her response and counter-petition, which is based upon a family agreement of the Cannon kin and the Reynolds kin of said infant, and the representatives of Elizabeth Holman Reynolds and her infant, as contained in the letter of W. M. Hendren and affidavit filed in the record, etc., be made effective, and if said tentative proposition and family agreement can be made effective, that it would not only be for the best interest of said infant, Anne Cannon Reynolds II, but would be a fair, just and equitable settlement, in so far as said infant is concerned, of all matters referred to in said petitions, response and counter-petition.”
On these findings made by him, it was ordered, adjudged, and decreed by Judge War lick:
“A. That it is not for the best interest of the infant, Anne Cannon Reynolds II, under the existing conditions, that the prayer of the petitioner, Cabarrus Bank and Trust Company, be granted, and it is therefore denied.
*298“B. That it is for tbe best interest of said infant, Anne Cannon Reynolds II, that the tentative proposition and family agreement referred to and set out in the response and counter-petition of Annie L. Cannon, guardian of said Anne Cannon Roynolds II, be made effective and binding, and it is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the said Mrs. Annie L. Cannon and Cabarrus Bank and Trust Company, guardians of said infant, Anne Cannon Reynolds II, be and they are hereby authorized, ordered, and instructed to do all things such as appearing in court, conferring with interested parties, and all other things necessary or expedient to bring about and make effective the tentative proposition and family agreement referred to in said response and counter-petition, and when and if said proposition and agreement is put in final form, subject to the approval of the necessary court decrees, that the same be presented to this court for its further consideration and action.
This cause is held for further orders and decrees.”
The only questions presented to Judge Warlick at the hearing of the cause were (1) whether, in view of the conditions now existing and affecting the estate of their ward, it is for her best interest that her guardians be authorized 'and instructed by the court to move in the Superior Court of Forsyth County that the decree rendered in the action referred to in the petition be set aside and vacated as to their ward, on the ground that said decree is void as to her; and (2) whether, if the court be of the opinion that the guardians should not be so authorized and instructed, it is for the best interest of their ward, that her guardians be authorized and instructed by the court to enter into negotiations with the proper persons for the purpose of effectuating the tentative proposition based upon the family agreement referred to in the response and counter-petition, and in the event said proposition is made effective by the approval of courts having jurisdiction of the parties thereto and of the subject-matter thereof, to report the same to the court for its further consideration and action.
These are the only questions which were considered and decided by Judge Warlick.
I am of the opinion that there was no error in his decision of these questions, and that his judgment should be affirmed. I do not concur in the judgment of this Court, reversing the judgment of Judge Warlick, nor do I think that the questions of law involving the validity of the decree of the Superior Court of Forsyth County, and the will of the father of the infant, discussed and apparently decided by this Court, are presented by this appeal.