TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Stevenson v. Bruce

Stevenson and Another v. Bruce

Stevenson v. Bruce, 10 Ind. 397 (1858)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Indiana Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 17, 1858
Citations
10 Ind. 397
Headnotes
A suit against a guardian upon a contract made by him touching his ward’s estate, is personal against the guardian, and not against him in his fiduciary capacity. Hence, he cannot, by resigning, cease to he a party to the suit and he made a Witness. A direction in the judgment in such a case that the levy be made of the effects of the ward, is error; hut it will be deemed to he amended in the Supreme Court.
Summary
APPEAL from the Cass Circuit 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

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

Per Curiam.

Thomas W. Stevenson, and John Green, guardian of Cosmo A. Stev.enson, a minor, leased to Charles Bruce a house and lot in Logansport, for five years, at 150 dollars a year. Bruce subleased the premises to another person, for four years and nine months, at 200 dollars a year.

Stevenson and Green refused to give possession to Bruce, or the sublessee. Bruce sued them for damages, and recovered 250 dollars. The Court rendered the judgment as. against Green, to be levied of the effects of his ward, Cos-mo A. Stevenson. Pending the suit, Green resigned his *398 guardianship, and was offered as a witness for his co-defendant, but he was rejected.

D. D. Pratt and S. C. Taber, for the appellants.

A suit against a guardian upon a contract made by him touching his ward’s estate, is personal against the guardian, and not against him in his fiduciary capacity. Hence, he could not, in this case, by resigning, cease to be a party to the suit. His rejection as a witness was, consequently, correct. It follows, also, that the direction in the judgment, to levy it of the ward’s effects, is error. Clark v. Casler, 1 Ind. R. 243.

As to the damages, we cannot say, under the evidence, that they are excessive — perhaps they might have been a few dollars less, but we are not at liberty to interfere, for this reason, with the verdict.

The error in the form of rendering the judgment may be considered as amended in this Court.

The judgment is affirmed, with 1 per cent, damages and costs.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 13 cases

View all citing references →
1863–1864: 11881–1882: 21883–1884: 11885–1886: 11887–1888: 21891–1892: 11893–1894: 21899–1900: 11903–1904: 11917–1918: 118632026peak 1881 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Baker v. Groves27 N.E. 640 (Ind. Ct. App. 1891)
  2. Payne v. Rech6 Ohio App. 327 (1917)
  3. Fillmore v. Wells10 Colo. 228 (1887)
  4. Lothrop v. Duffield96 N.W. 577 (Mich. 1903)
  5. McKinney v. Jones11 N.W. 606 (Wis. 1882)
  6. Turner v. Flagg33 N.E. 1104 (Ind. Ct. App. 1893)

Most recent

  1. Payne v. Rech6 Ohio App. 327 (1917)
  2. Lothrop v. Duffield96 N.W. 577 (Mich. 1903)
  3. Hall v. Ferguson57 N.E. 153 (Ind. Ct. App. 1900)
  4. Miller v. Hart34 N.E. 1003 (Ind. 1893)
  5. Turner v. Flagg33 N.E. 1104 (Ind. Ct. App. 1893)
  6. Baker v. Groves27 N.E. 640 (Ind. Ct. App. 1891)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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