Legal Opinion

Schapiro v. Solomon

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 26, 1961No. Civ. 19910PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTobriner, J.

We set forth hereinafter why we have concluded that the probate court correctly applied section 92 of the Probate Code (the antilapse statute) to the legacy involved in this case. The will provided for a $1,500 legacy to the daughter of the testatrix. Since the daughter predeceased the testatrix, the court properly ruled that the legacy went to the daughter’s lineal descendant, the granddaughter of the testatrix, even though, as to certain other property, the will specifically provided that the same granddaughter would be substituted for her mother in case of her death.

The disputed section of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jensen v. NelsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1945
  2. Estate of CarrollCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. In Re Estate of KelleherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Mockbee v. DunnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  5. Phelps v. PhelpsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1910

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Estate of GoulartCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  2. Estate of SalisburyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  3. Estate of CaseyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
  4. Estate of RobertsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  5. Batchelor v. TalbotCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API