Carstensen v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). It is assigned as error that the trial court sustained a demurrer to the complaint for want of jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the action, until such time as the probate court should lose jurisdiction over the res. But it is a settled rule that a creditor may not bring an action against the surety on an- executor’s bond until after the final accounting and settlement of the estate in probate. Commonwealth v. Magee, 220 Pa. 201, 69 A. 805; Reed v. Hume, 25 Utah, 248, 70 P. 998; Probate Court v. Chapin, 31 Vt. 375. Exceptions to that rule are found in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Payne v. HookSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Sutton v. EnglishSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Hess v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Yonley v. LavenderSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Flanigan v. Security-First Nat. BankDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1941
- Ellis v. StevensDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1941
- Patuleia v. PatuleiaDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1955
- Putnam v. Citizens' Nat. Trust & Savings Bank of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1935
- Lemke v. JanderDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021