Forde v. Exempt Fire Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Third Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The complaint- alleged, in substance, that Matthew Maume was a resident of the city of San Francisco from the year 1849 until the year 1854, when he left for the city of Mexico.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Third Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The complaint- alleged, in substance, that Matthew Maume was a resident of the city of San Francisco from the year 1849 until the year 1854, when he left for the city of Mexico. That he owned several parcels of real estate in San Francisco, and, in January, 1859, was in Limerick, Ireland, and there made a conveyance of said real estate to Michael Dundon, his brother-in-law, and inserted in the conveyance a consideration as paid, but that no consideration was paid, and that the deed was made to keep the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
1. By section 1589 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it is provided that when there is a deficiency of assets in the hands of an administrator, and when the decedent in his lifetime has conveyed any real estate with intent to defraud his creditors, the administrator may maintain an action to recover the same for the benefit of the creditors of the deceased. By section 1415, a special administrator may, for certain enumerated purposes, and “for all necessary purposes,” maintain actions and other legal proceedings, “as an administrator” By “necessary purposes” is meant purposes…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Ruiz v. Santa Barbara Gas & Elec. Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Scholle v. FinnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Aigeltinger v. EinsteinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Bielenberg v. HigginsMontana Supreme Court · 1929
- Allan-Macmaster Co. v. ExtersteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.