Legal Opinion
In Re Estate of Harris
California Supreme Court
Decided March 31, 1915No. L.A. No. 3839PublishedCited by 59 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
Personal property may be held by two or more persons in joint tenancy. There is no distinction, in this respect, between real property and personal property. (Denigan v. San Francisco Sav. Union, 127 Cal. 142, [78 Am. St. Rep. 35, 59 Pac. 390]; Kennedy v. McMurray, ante, p. 287, [146 Pac. 647].)
“A joint interest is one owned by several persons in equal shares, by a title created by a single will or transfer, when expressly declared in the will or transfer to be a joint tenancy, or when granted or devised to executors or trustees as joint tenants.” (Civ. Code, sec. 683.)
“A transfer may be made…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kennedy v. McMurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Witt v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1852
- Denigan v. San Francisco Savings UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Hannon v. Southern Pac. R. R. Co.California Court of Appeal · 1909
3Cited by59 opinions
- Siberell v. SiberellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Estate of HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- In Re Estate of GurnseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Feltz v. PavlikMissouri Court of Appeals · 1953
- Fish v. Security-First National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.