Legal Opinion

Parr v. Reyman

California Supreme Court

Decided June 16, 1932No. Docket No. L.A. 13274PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.

Action against the defendant as administratrix with the will annexed of the estate of Willard A. Parr, deceased, to declare an oral trust in certain real and personal property. Plaintiff and Willard A. Parr were brothers. Their mother, Elizabeth Parr, died on or about May 3, 1916, leaving as her heirs at law the plaintiff, Virgil E. Parr, the deceased, Willard A. Parr, a third son, Enoch D. Parr, and a daughter, Emma A. Brady. She also left a last will and testament which was admitted to probate. By the terms of said will her entire estate was left to her two sons, Virgil and Enoch, and to…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Newport v. HattonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. In re the Estate of BurdickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Cooley v. Miller & LuxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Martinovich v. MarsicanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  5. In re the Estate of BurtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Loring v. Town of KingsleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Lewis v. BowmanMontana Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Collins v. CollinsArizona Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Airola v. GorhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. Mason v. PelkesIdaho Supreme Court · 1936

6 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