Legal Opinion

Francoeur v. Beatty

California Supreme Court

Decided August 5, 1915No. S.F. No. 6524PublishedCited by 17 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Stanley Moore, George K. Ford, and Wilder Wight, for Appellant.

1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.

This action was brought by plaintiff to establish an oral trust, in certain stocks and bonds and other personal property in the possession of defendant and which in her lifetime belonged to a Mrs. Elizabeth B. Hitchcock. Plaintiff, though not related to Mrs. Hitchcock, had lived with her for many years as her intimate friend and companion. Defendant had been the attorney and adviser of Mrs. Hitchcock for several years before her death and their relations were very friendly. Mrs. Hitchcock had no children and her only heir at law in this state was a niece—Mrs. Smith—with whom she was not at…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Crocker v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Driscoll v. DriscollCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Visher v. WebsterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
  4. Fisher v. LudwigCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Hansen v. Bear Film Co.California Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Sylvain v. PageMontana Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Burkett v. DotyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Hausfelder v. Security-First National BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  5. Marans v. NewlandMontana Supreme Court · 1962

12 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