TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re the Guardianship of the Person & Estate of Carver

In the Matter of the Guardianship of the Person and Estate of D. B. CARVER, Jr., a Minor

In re the Guardianship of the Person & Estate of Carver, 50 P. 22 (Cal. 1897)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
September 8, 1897
Docket
No. S. F. No. 716
Judges
Fleet, Garoutte, Harrison
Citations
50 P. 22118 Cal. 731897 Cal. LEXIS 735
Headnotes
Gtjaedian and Waed—Investment by Guaedian without Authobity oe Couet—Loans upon Inadequate Seoueity—Rejection oe Loans as Assets.—A guardian, by securing the consent of the court, may invest the ward’s estate without risk to himself; but where he fails to do so, and assumes to act upon his own responsibility, he is held to a strict accountability; and where loans are made without the advice and consent of the court upon inadequate security, and were not such as a prudent business man would have made, the court may properly reject such loans as assets of the estate.
Summary
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Napa County, settling the final account of a guardian. E. D. Ham, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Garoutte

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

GAROUTTE, J.

P. G. Riehl, as guardian of the person and estate of D. B. Carver, Jr., appeals from an order settling his final account. Upon the hearing of this account it appeared that the guardian had invested a large portion of the ward’s estate in two loans secured by mortgage upon realty. These loans were made without the advice and consent of the court, and at the hearing of the account were rejected as assets of the estate. As to the acts of the guardian pertaining to these loans, the court found as a fact that they were made upon inadequate security, and were not such as a prudent business man would have made. Upon an examination nf the evidence we are satisfied with this finding. There is no good reason presented why the court should disturb it. The guardian did not exercise that care in the management of his ward’s estate which the law demands by reason of the trust relation that he assumed. By securing the consent of the court he could have invested the ward’s estate without risk to himself. This he failed to do, but assumed to act upon his own responsibility. Under such circumstances he is held to a strict accountability. (See Guardianship of Cardwell, 55 Cal. 137 .)

The order is affirmed.

Harrison, J., and Van Fleet, J., concurred.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1901: 21916: 21933: 119012026peak 1901 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Kilby v. Burnham256 N.W. 522 (N.D. 1933)
  2. Cabell v. McLish1916 OK 710, 160 P. 592
  3. Anderson v. Anderson1916 OK 548, 165 P. 145
  4. In re Averill's Estate66 P. 14 (Cal. 1901)
  5. In re Estate of Schandoney65 P. 877 (Cal. 1901)

Most recent

  1. Kilby v. Burnham256 N.W. 522 (N.D. 1933)
  2. Cabell v. McLish1916 OK 710, 160 P. 592
  3. Anderson v. Anderson1916 OK 548, 165 P. 145
  4. In re Averill's Estate66 P. 14 (Cal. 1901)
  5. In re Estate of Schandoney65 P. 877 (Cal. 1901)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Guardianship of Cardwell, 55 Cal. 137 (1880) 23

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list