Legal Opinion
Thomas v. Fairchild
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 3, 1956No. Civ. 21804PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
VALLÉE, J.
Appeal by Arthur A. Fairchild, executor of the will of Myrtle F. Welch, from an order allowing Le Roy Thomas fees for extraordinary services as attorney for the executor.
Without making a formal motion, respondent suggests that this court is without jurisdiction of the appeal and that it must be dismissed. We agree.
On October 31, 1955, the probate court signed and filed an order reading:
“It is hereby ordered by the Court that the sum of $750.00 is allowed to said Le Roy Thomas, one of the attorney’s for Arthur A. Fairchild, the sole beneficiary of the estate herein, for services…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Estate of Hanley v. HanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Stanton v. Superior Court of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Diamond v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Estate of SmeadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Bright v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re MorrowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- Schisler v. MitchellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Fritz v. FooteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Garcia v. LucidoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- Meier v. HeckelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.