Legal Opinion

Trumpler v. Trumpler

California Supreme Court

Decided January 7, 1899No. Sac. No. 398PublishedCited by 33 opinions

MOTION to recall a remittitur, and to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Yolo County denying a new trial. E. C. Hart, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.

The case is now before us upon a submitted motion of J. H. Glide for an order recalling the remittitur hereinbefore issued, vacating the judgment of this court reversing the order of the superior court denying a new trial, and dismissing the appeal.

The facts upon which the motion is based, appearing upon the face of the moving papers, are substantially these: The parties named as plaintiffs and defendants were the heirs and successors in interest of one Louis Trumpler, deceased, who died August 15, 1882, leaving several large tracts of land in Yolo county. The action was for the partition…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Ryer v. RyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Rowland v. KreyenhagenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
  3. In re Estate of LevinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  4. People v. MullanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Hanson v. McCueCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Clemmer v. Hartford Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Isenberg v. ShermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. In Re RothrockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  4. King v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  5. In Re MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962

28 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