Legal Opinion

Rinker v. McKinley

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 29, 1944No. Civ. 14364PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.

—From a judgment in favor of defendant after trial before the court without a jury in an action to have certain real and personal property declared to be property of the estate of plaintiff’s decedent, plaintiff appeals.

Plaintiff, administratrix of the estate of William Henry Rinker, was married to decedent on December 3, 1931. On June 2, 1933, they separated. After separation decedent’s only source of income was a pension which he received from the Federal Pension System for postal employees. With this income he paid bills which had been contracted during the time he and plaintiff were…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Duncan v. RamishCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Kyle v. CraigCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Glass v. City of FresnoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  4. Brovelli v. BianchiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  5. People v. One 1938 Buick SedanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Devers v. GreenwoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  2. Cox v. CoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Talbot v. GadiaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  4. Hudson v. WestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Hughes v. GrandyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

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