Beckman v. McKay
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Fourteenth District. The second and third instructions, though not ipscrtejl.in t,h© opinion, are of no importance. /»'
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
This action is in the nature of an action of trovor and conversion, and is brought under the 116th Section of the statute “to regulate the settlement of the estates of deceased persons.”
The section is as follows: “If any person, before the granting of letters testamentary or of administration, shall embezzle or alienate any of the moneys, goods, chattels, or effects, of any deceased person, he shall be liable to the action of the executor or administrator for double the value of the property so embezzled or alienated.”
The facts are not set out in the record. The ¡Headings show averments on…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Levy v. Superior Court of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Jahns v. NoltingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- People's Lumber Co. v. GillardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
- Shawnee Nat. Bank v. Van ZantSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- Delfelder v. PostonWyoming Supreme Court · 1930
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.