Legal Opinion
White v. Deering
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 28, 1918No. Civ. No. 1826PublishedCited by 5 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The action was to establish a claim against the estate of Sophie P. Comstock, deceased. The claim was properly'presented, but was rejected by the executrix. Suit was thereupon brought in the superior court within the time required by the statute, and plaintiff obtained judgment, from which the appeal has been taken.
The first item in the complaint was: “To services rendered in carrying decedent from her room upstairs to lawn and from lawn to her room upstairs at an agreed price of $15 per month, $45.” This was also the exact language of the claim as presented to the executrix. The court…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Cox v. McLaughlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Frost v. WitterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Pollitz v. WickershamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Doolittle v. McConnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Ruiz v. Santa Barbara Gas & Elec. Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Palmer v. GreggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- State Ex Rel. Paramount Publix Corp. v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1931
- Bradner v. WoodsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Luther v. FosterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- State Ex Rel. Paramount Publix Corp. v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1931