Legal Opinion

Tricou v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided December 8, 1930No. K-342PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLittleton, Judge

The defense in this case is, first, that the plaintiff’s mother was not, in fact, dependent upon him for her chief support since certain of his other brothers contributed to her support and, under section 206 of the code of the State of California, it was the duty of the other children to maintain their mother to the extent of their ability; secondly, that the portion of the claimed rental and subsistence allowance for the period July 1 to July 31, 1923, is barred by the statute of limitation provided in section 156 of the Judicial Code.

The facts establish that plaintiff’s mother was…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Tomlinson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1929
  2. Freeland v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1928
  3. Haas v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1929
  4. Walbach v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1929

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Kirk v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1964
  2. Mistretta v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1954
  3. Smith v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1943
  4. White v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1942
  5. Melka v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API