Legal Opinion

Estate of Kramme

California Supreme Court

Decided February 6, 1978No. S.F. 23660PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BIRD, C. J.

Charles Paul Kramme appeals from a probate court judgment disqualifying him from succeeding to any interest in his wife’s estate. The probate court concluded that Charles had intentionally committed an unlawful act that resulted in his wife’s death and, therefore, Probate Code section 258 precluded him from inheriting from her. Charles contends that Probate Code section 258 applies only to intentional killings. Since the court found that he did not intend to kill his wife, Charles argues he is entitled to succeed to his wife’s estate. This court agrees.

I

The facts of the case…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  2. County of Placer v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.California Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Beck v. West Coast Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  4. County of Madera v. GendronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  5. United States v. KnutzenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Izazaga v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  3. People v. VelasquezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Marini v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  5. Ross v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011

29 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