Opinion · Supreme Court of North Carolina

Latham, Ex Parte

41 N.C. 406

Type: Opinion
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Date: 1849-12-05
Topic: general

Ruffin, C. J. This cause was here at June term 1846, upon cross appeals by the guardian of Daniel Latham, a lunatic, and by two of his creditors. It was remanded *407 with a declaration, that a fund in Court was net more than adequate to the maintenance of the lunatic, and, therefore, that no part of it ought to be paid to the creditors, who had proved their debts before the master,or retained by the guardian by way of reimbursing to him a balance due for debts of the lunatic, discharged by him without the previous authority of the Court. 4 Ire. Eq. 231.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Latham, Ex Parte. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 1 opinion

LATHAM,EX PARTE,41 N.C. 406(1849)

THOMAS LATHAM, EX PARTE.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

(December Term, 1849.)

1. When the land of a lunatic is sold on the petition of the guardian, the proceeds are under the direction of the court, and no creditor can claim a priority.

2. When the lunatic dies, or his disability is removed, then the property remaining, or its proceeds, is to be delivered over — to the lunatic himself in the latter case or to his representatives in the former case, and, of course will then be subject to the claims of the creditors as in other cases of individual debtors.

APPEAL from the Court of Equity of BEAUFORT, Fall Term, 1846,Bailey, J.

The case is stated in the opinion delivered in this Court.

Shaw for Plaintiff.J.H. Bryan for defendant.

RUFFIN, C.J.

This cause was here at June Term, 1846, upon cross appeals by the guardian of Daniel Latham, a lunatic, and by two of his creditors. It was remanded with a declaration that a fraud (407) in court was not more than adequate to the maintenance of the lunatic. and, therefore, that no part of it ought to be paid to the creditors, who had proved their debts before the master, or retained by the guardian by way of reimbursing to him a balance due for debts of thePage 288lunatic, discharged by him without the previous authority of the court.Latham, ex parte,39 N.C. 231. The fund consisted of $942.14, which was the produce of real estate ordered by the court of equity to be sold, and it was all that remained of the lunatic's estate, and was in the master's office. Afterwards the lunatic became of sane memory, and at his instance the commission was superseded; and he then applied to the court of equity, on petition, for an order that he might withdraw the residue of the fund remaining unexpended, in order to apply it to the payment of his debts, stating that he had examined the accounts rendered by his late guardian, and was satisfied of their correctness. The guardian made no objection, though a considerable balance appeared to be due him. But Wiswall, one of the creditors, opposed the application, and moved for an order that a debt to him should be first satisfied, the same being due on a judgment on which an execution was issued, which was levied on the land before it was sold under an order for that purpose. The court directed the money to be paid to Daniel Latham; and Wiswall appealed.

The notion on which the appeal was taken is that the creditor got a priority by force of his judgment and execution. But the decisions between these parties, when the case was first brought here,Latham v. Wiswall,37 N.C. 294, and also when last here, are clearly against that. After an order of the court directing a sale of the lunatic's estate for the purpose of the proceedings in the matter of the lunacy, creditors cannot get at the fund in any manner but by an order of the court. (408) The maintenance of the lunatic is to be provided for, in the first instance; and then the means of doing so cannot be touched but by the leave of the court, under whose direction the support of the lunatic and the ordering of his affairs are placed. There can, then, be no lien in the case; at least, when there is no specific property of the lunatic not embraced in the order for the sale. The consequence is that, when the charge of the lunatic and his affairs by the court ceases by reason of the death, or restoration of the reason, of the lunatic, and the rendering his account by the committee, the court proceeds no further in administering the fund, but simply gives it into the hands of the lunatic or his representative, where it will be amenable to creditors in the same manner as the estate of other debtors, and with the same power of preference by the debtor between his creditors.

PER CURIAM. Order affirmed, with costs.Cited: Dowell v. Jacks,58 N.C. 420.Page 289

(409)