Legal Opinion
In Re the Estate of Meyer
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 14, 1919No. Civ. No. 3078PublishedCited by 13 opinions
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco refusing probate of a will. Thomas F. Graham, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWaste, P. J.
This is an appeal from an order refusing probate to the last will of Benno Meyer, deceased, which was executed on the fifth day of March, 1917. Three-fourths of the entire estate of the decedent is, by the will, bequeathed and devised to the mother and brothers of the deceased. The remaining one-fourth is disposed of as follows:
“As I am about to be married to Camille Lasky, of the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, and desire to make some provision for her in ease of said marriage, I do hereby give, bequeath and devise unto her an undivided one-fourth (1/4)of each and all…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- In re Estate of ComassiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Ellis v. DardenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1890
- Sanders v. SimcichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Swan v. HammondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
- Sutton v. HancockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Logan v. ShelbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Poisl v. FergusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Large v. DierckenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Haselbud v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Appenfelder v. Security Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.