Martin v. White

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• opining that potential ward must be personally served notice because only interested party is potential ward, and they should merely need personal notice to prompt their presence and desire for an immediate hearing (citing Evans v. Johnson, 19 S.E. 623, 624-25 (W. Va. 1894))
• “The jurisdiction ... to appoint guardians for insane and incompetent persons is derived from the statute, and in order to obtain such jurisdiction it must affirmatively appear that the essential provisions of the statute were complied with.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re the Guardianship of Smith
  Supreme Court of The Virgin Islands· 2010-11-15· cited 30×
• In the Matter of the Guardianship of Yuk Lan Moylan, Ward, Richard E. Moylan v. Lina Lelialoha Moylan Alston
  Supreme Court of Guam· 2021-10-22· cited 8×
• Colby v. Jacobs
  Supreme Court of Oklahoma· 1936-12-22· cited 6×
• Tuppela v. Chichagoff Mining Co.
  Ninth Circuit· 1920-07-06· cited 1×

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Chicago
  Supreme Court· 1897-03-01· cited 1,229×
• New Orleans Water Works Co. v. New Orleans
  Supreme Court· 1896-11-30· cited 104×
• Chase v. Hathaway
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1817-07-15· cited 71×
• Hunt v. Searcy
  Supreme Court of Missouri· 1902-02-19· cited 40×
• Evans v. Johnson
  West Virginia Supreme Court· 1894-04-04· cited 35×
• Eddy v. People ex rel. Eddy
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1854-06-15· cited 29×
• North v. Joslin
  Michigan Supreme Court· 1886-02-10· cited 28×
• Martin v. Motsinger
  Indiana Supreme Court· 1892-03-08· cited 20×
• Stewart v. Taylor
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1901-06-07· cited 18×
• Smith v. Burlingame
  U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island· 1825-11-15· cited 5×