Legal Opinion

Elizalde v. Elizalde

California Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1902No. L.A. No. 851PublishedCited by 50 opinions

The main facts are stated in the opinion rendered in Department One. Further facts are stated in the opinion rendered in Bank.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

Upon the former hearing in this ease, in Department One, the principal, and indeed the sole, argument of appellant was addressed to the proposition that, as the trust fund was not earmarked, plaintiff was relegated to the position of a general creditor of the estate, who should have presented his claim with other creditors, and that hav ing failed so to do, the judgment should be reversed. It was to this contention that the opinion of the court in department was addressed. Upon petition for rehearing new points were presented, to which the attention of this court was invited, and it was urged…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cushing v. PiresCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Tyler v. MayreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Ginocchio v. CoffmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Whyler v. Van TigerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by50 opinions

  1. Newport v. HattonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Hewitt v. HayesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
  3. Estate of Dutard v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Estate of ArmsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Garrison v. Edward Brown & SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944

45 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