Redmond v. Peterson
Citations
- 102 Cal. 595
- 36 P. 923
- 1894 Cal. LEXIS 691
Syllabus
<p>Parties—Guardian of Incompetent Person.—The guardian of an incompetent person is neither a necessary nor a proper party to an action upon a note and mortgage assigned by the incompetent person to the plaintiff.</p> <p>Id.—Service of Summons Upon Incompetent Person—Appearance of General Guardian—Joint Answer—Jurisdiction of Person— Amended Complaint.—The rule that the appointment and appearance of guardians ad litem without a personal service of summons upon the incompetent is void, does not apply where the incompetent person appears by a general guardian; but in such case where the incompetent person appears by attorney, and, jointly with the general guardian, files an answer, and goes to trial upon the issues made by the pleadings, a judgment rendered against him is binding as far as any question of personal 'jurisdiction is concerned, and it is immaterial whether he was brought into the action by an amended complaint rather than by the original, or whether his guardian was wrongfully sued instead of the incompetent person in the original complaint.</p>
Cited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- In Re Daniel S.California Court of Appeal· 2004-02-11· cited 52×
- State ex rel. Happel v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court· 1909-01-18· cited 40×
- Bank of America v. CarrCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1956-01-30· cited 30×
- Loock v. Pioneer Title Insurance and Trust Co.California Court of Appeal· 1935-01-29· cited 15×
- Biaggi v. Corte de Distrito de PonceSupreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1948-03-15· cited 8×
- San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. Leticia S.California Court of Appeal· 2004-02-11· cited 1×
- Taylor v. EllenbergerCalifornia Supreme Court· 1901-07-16
- Biaggi v. District Court of PonceSupreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1948-03-15
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Emeric v. AlvaradoCalifornia Supreme Court· 1884-01-31· cited 83×
- Gray v. Palmer & EatonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1858-07-01· cited 39×
- Smith v. McDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court· 1871-10-15· cited 17×
- Johnston v. San Francisco Savings UnionCalifornia Supreme Court· 1883-06-23· cited 10×
- McCloskey v. SweeneyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1884-10-28· cited 5×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.