Legal Opinion

Lucas v. Hamm

California Supreme Court

Decided September 5, 1961No. S. F. 20269PublishedCited by 409 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.

Plaintiffs, who are some of the beneficiaries under the will of Eugene H. Emmick, deceased, brought this action for damages against defendant L. S. Hamm, an attorney at law who had been engaged by the testator to prepare the will. They have appealed from a judgment of dismissal entered after an order sustaining a general demurrer to the second amended complaint without leave to amend.

The allegations of the first and second causes of action are summarized as follows: Defendant agreed with the testator, for a consideration, to prepare a will and codicils thereto for him by which plaintiffs were…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Comunale v. Traders & General InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Biakanja v. IrvingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Savings Bank v. WardSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  4. Hartman Ranch Co. v. Associated Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
  5. James Stewart & Co. v. LawTexas Supreme Court · 1950

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

3Cited by409 opinions

  1. Dillon v. LeggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Green Spring Farms v. KerstenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Crisci v. Security InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Neel v. Magana, Olney, Levy, Cathcart & GelfandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Goodman v. KennedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976

404 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