¶1The practice hath been, as I understand, to serve the scire facias upon the guardian, when there is one, and upon the infant where there is ho guardian, and for the court upon the return of the sci.fa. to appoint a guardian : This practice is liable to objection ; the guardian thus appointed gives no security, and if he conducts himself improperly in the management of the defence, the infant in many instances may lose a remedy against him, for want of such security. However, as the practice has been so settled, we will appoint a guardian for this de-fence ; but let the bar take notice hereafter, to have guardians appointed by the proper courts before the scire facias issues.
3 N.C. 74
Anonymous
Superior Court of North Carolina
Decided March 15, 1799
Superior Court of North Carolina · decided 1799-03-15
QCIRE facias against an infant, who had no guardian, and it was taken out to subject his land to a debt of the ancestor.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 1795
2 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1799-03-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →