Carver v. Barker

DORAN, J. According to the appellant’s brief, “This case is here upon an appeal by the ward (now restored to competency) , Myrtle D. Barker, etc., arising out of the appointment of a non-resident niece of appellant as her guardian, culminating in an arbitrary approval of her accounts, notwithstanding the failure to account for various properties . . ., and the manner in which she acted in respect to the properties. . . .” The appeal is, in effect, a general and specific attack upon all steps taken in the guardianship proceedings from the original [70]appointment to and including the settlement of the guardian’s final account.

The record on appeal, as noted by respondent, is “fragmentary, partial, and most incomplete.” It contains clerk’s transcripts and reporters’ transcripts of a part only of the entire proceedings. The appellant’s briefs include a sweeping denunciation of the trial judge and censures the conduct of respondent’s attorney.

It appears that on the petition of appellant’s sister, an Order for Detention of appellant was issued on July 21, 1944, by Superior Court Judge Myron Westover, and on July 24, 1944, Superior Court Judge Dudley S. Valentine committed appellant to the county hospital pending a hearing on July 26, 1944. There is a certificate of service of this order upon appellant signed by H. J. Gormley, Deputy Sheriff. On the day specified and after hearing several witnesses including two medical examiners appointed by the court, appellant was committed to the state hospital at Camarillo, California.

On July 14, 1944, respondent Mary Carver, a niece, filed a petition for appointment as guardian of the appellant; a citation was issued for a hearing on July 27,1944. Although appellant insists that “no service in fact was ever made upon her,” there is a sheriff’s return showing service on appellant on July 17, 1944. Appellant, then confined at Camarillo, was not present at the guardianship proceedings and an affidavit of Dr. A. Vincent Gerty, one of the medical examiners who had been appointed at the commitment hearing, was presented to the court stating that “It does not seem advisable that she appear in court for the guardianship proceedings.”

At the guardianship hearing on July 27, 1944 before Superior Court Judge Thomas C. Gould, the petitioner Mary Carver testified to the required residence in Los Angeles County. Dr. Gerty who had examined Mrs. Barker in the commitment proceedings, testified that the “Mrs. Barker has been committed as an insane person to the State Hospital at Camarillo, ’ ’ and that11 She has syphilis of the central nervous system, commonly called general paresis.” The respondent Mary Carver was appointed guardian of appellant’s person and estate, gave bond as such guardian and proceeded to administer the estate.