Legal Opinion

In Re Estate of Fain

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 21, 1999No. B119122PublishedCited by 76 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CROSKEY, J.

In this probate matter we consider an appeal by a former administrator of the decedent’s estate and her surety from a judgment imposing a surcharge of $715,000, plus interest, attorney’s fees and costs. Eleanor Fain and her surety, Highlands Insurance Company (Highlands; collectively, the appellants), seek reversal of a “Judgment After Trial” entered after a 12-day bench trial conducted by an agreed-upon retired judge. The primary issues raised are whether the trial judge was properly appointed and empowered to render a binding judgment and, if so, whether substantial…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Bowers v. BernardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  2. Blanton v. Womancare, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1985
  3. In Re HortonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  4. In Re Richard S.California Supreme Court · 1991
  5. National Secretarial Service, Inc. v. FroehlichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989

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

3Cited by76 opinions

  1. Jameson v. DestaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
  2. Foust v. San Jose Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 2011
  3. Leader v. CordsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  4. Kern County Department of Child Support Services v. CamachoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  5. People v. Seneca InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004

71 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