In re Estate of Kincaid
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Mateo County. George H. Buck, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1DissentVan Fleet, J.
I dissent. The court found: “That notwithstanding the fact that said Kincaid arrived at his majority on the twenty-fourth day of May, 1890, by common and mutual consent of said Kincaid and the said Gordon the relationship of guardian and ward continued, and the said Kincaid received from the said Gordon the amounts of money set forth and contained in the said account, subsequent to the said twenty-fourth day of May, 1890, and the said Gordon received for the account and benefit of said Kincaid, as such guardian, the sums of money and property set forth and contained in said account.”
And it is…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- In re the estate of MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Clary v. ClaryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- People v. SeelyeIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
- In re AllgierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- In re Estates of BeiselCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.