Legal Opinion

In re Estate of Cahill

California Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 1887No. 11382PublishedCited by 22 opinions

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco setting aside a verdict. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Hayne, C.

C. — William P. Cahill, a minor, commenced a contest to set aside the will of Ellen Cahill, deceased, on the ground of undue influence. No guardian ad litem was appointed to commence the proceedings, the written grounds of opposition being signed with his own name. The proponent filed an answer, in which no objection was" made for the want of a guardian ad litem. After the issues were settled, — Milton C. Babb acting as attorney for the contestant, — the matter came up for trial, and then the court, upon petition of the contestant, made an order “ that M. C. Hassett be and he is…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Brooke v. ClarkTexas Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Townsend v. TallantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  3. Schemerhorn v. JenkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1811
  4. Bartlett v. BattsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1854
  5. Sabine v. FisherWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Urbach v. UrbachWyoming Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Johnston v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Foley v. California Horseshoe Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Tinsley v. Palo Alto Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  5. In Re Estate of BixlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924

17 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