Legal Opinion

Wilson v. Halsell

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 25, 1956No. Civ. No. 5248PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

This is an appeal from an order allowing attorneys’ fees for extraordinary services.

Mrs. Halsell died leaving a will naming her sister as sole devisee, with a nephew as contingent beneficiary. The will appointed the nephew as executor or, if he was unwilling to act, appointed the sister as executor. Both declined to act and O. L. Halsell, husband of the deceased, was appointed administrator with the will annexed. After an inventory was filed, the sister filed a petition alleging that it failed to disclose all of the property of the estate in that it did not include certain interests in…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. In Re Estate of HiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. In Re Estate of HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Murphy v. O'ConnorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Corotto v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Estate of PryorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Estate of KortheCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  2. Clifton v. Security First National BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API