Legal Opinion

Field v. Shorb

California Supreme Court

Decided October 9, 1893No. 19194PublishedCited by 32 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.

This action was brought by the public administrator, acting as the administrator of the estate of Daniel J. Harris, deceased; and in form it purports to be an *663action to obtain an accounting of the transactions between the defendants, A. S. Shorb and his wife, Mattie L. Shorb, and the said Daniel J. Harris in his lifetime. But the main averments of the complaint are that on the thirteenth day of May, 1890, the deceased drew a check for $500, payable to Mattie L. Shorb, and delivered the same to her; that on the third day of July, 1890, the deceased drew another check for $1,288.25, payable to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re SpencerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Wenban Estate, Inc. v. HewlettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Fewel & Dawes, Inc. v. PrattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Lefrooth v. PrenticeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  4. In re Estate of RedfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Taylor v. Savings Union Bank & Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1915

27 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