Legal Opinion

In Re Newell

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 15, 1912No. Civ. No. 904PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The appeal is from an order and judgment of removal of the executor. Several charges of misconduct were specified in the petition. The one which the court made the basis for its order is embraced in the following findings:

"That prior to the year 1895, Sidney W. Newell was a member of the firm of Eaton, Newell Buckley, and prior to the year 1895, the above-named firm borrowed from Miss A. M. Upstone, who at said time was, and ever since has been, and now is, a sister in law of Sidney W. Newell, the sum of $3,000, and upon the dissolution of the above-named firm, in the year 1894 or 1895, it…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Thomas v. HosselkusCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  2. Staacke v. BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Estate of PalmCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  2. Botsford v. MacIntoshCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  3. Estate of ColeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  4. Estate of AtkinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Bauer v. WillisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925

5 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