Snyder v. Snyder
Citations
- 142 Ill. 60
- 31 N.E. 303
Syllabus
<p>1. Insane person — conservator—when appointed — test of sanity of respondent. On an application, under the statute, for the aj>pointment of a conservator for an insane or distracted person, the true and proper test is whether the defendant has sufficient mental capacity to transact, ordinary business, and to take care of and manage his property. If he is incapable of understanding and acting with discretion in the ordinary affairs of life, then he is a person of unsound-mind, and incapable of managing his estate.</p> <p>2. On the trial of a proceeding to adjudge a party insane or incapable of taking care of and managing his property, the execution of a deed conveying the respondent’s property to a trustee, after the institution of the proceeding, can have no special bearing on the merits of the case.</p> <p>3. Probate courts — jurisdiction. Under section 5 of the act of 1877, for the establishing of probate courts, the jurisdiction of all probate matters, and all matters in relation to the appointment of guardians and conservators, and the settlement of their estates, is transferred from the county court to the probate court in all counties where the latter court is established.</p> <p>4. Appeal prom probate court — to circuit court — trial de novo — appointment of conservator. A trial of an appeal irom the order of the probate court adjudging a person insane is given to the circuit court, and on such appeal the trial is to be de novo, and the latter court may appoint a conservator of the respondent, the same as the probate court might have done. On a trial de novo the circuit court stands in the shoes of the probate court, and is clothed with the same powers and jurisdiction as that court.</p> <p>5. Practice in the Supreme Court — confession of error. The concession of an appellee, in his argument in the Appellate Court, as to the power of the circuit court on the trial of an appeal from an order of the probate court adjudging a person to be distracted or insane
Judges: Bailey, Craig
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
20 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Bernier v. Illinois Central RailroadIllinois Supreme Court· 1921-02-15· cited 93×
- Pulaski County v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1911-01-30· cited 42×
- Ure v. UreIllinois Supreme Court· 1906-10-23· cited 37×
- People Ex Rel. Houghland v. LeonardIllinois Supreme Court· 1953-05-20· cited 29×
- MacDonald v. La Salle National BankIllinois Supreme Court· 1957-03-20· cited 14×
- McMahan v. TrautvetterIllinois Supreme Court· 1922-10-21· cited 14×
- Crouse v. GreensfelderMissouri Court of Appeals· 1909-06-22· cited 10×
- Rankin v. RankinAppellate Court of Illinois· 1944-02-29· cited 9×
- Duwe v. RodgersIndiana Court of Appeals· 1982-08-02· cited 7×
- Moats v. MooreAppellate Court of Illinois· 1916-04-17· cited 7×
- In Re Marriage of KutchinsAppellate Court of Illinois· 1985-07-15· cited 6×
- Estate of Johnson v. KilpatrickAppellate Court of Illinois· 1928-11-27· cited 6×
- Rathbun v. RimmermanAppellate Court of Illinois· 1955-06-20· cited 5×
- Schwartz v. O'ConNellAppellate Court of Illinois· 1936-07-03· cited 5×
- McCullough v. JudsonIllinois Supreme Court· 1927-10-22· cited 4×
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. ThompsonFifth Circuit· 1906-03-06· cited 3×
- Wesemann v. FoleyAppellate Court of Illinois· 1923-12-10· cited 2×
- Dowdall v. HutchensAppellate Court of Illinois· 1931-04-14· cited 2×
- Yancy v. ErmanCuyahoga County Common Pleas Court· 1951-01-29· cited 1×
- Leefers v. People ex rel. LeefersAppellate Court of Illinois· 1906-02-01
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.