Legal Opinion

Muessig v. Muessig

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 17, 2004No. Nos. A104772, A105254PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HAERLE, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Appellant, Julia Muessig, and respondent, Michael Muessig, are the Estate of Regli’s only remaining potential beneficiaries. They have filed a motion seeking a “stipulated partial reversal” of several probate court orders. Because this request does not meet either the statutory guidelines set out in Code of Civil Procedure, section 128, subdivision (a)(8),1 or rule 8 of this court’s local rules, the motion is denied.

*880II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On October 29, 2003, the probate court issued an order settling the final account of David Hitchcock, the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Lazzarone v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  2. Union Bank of California v. Braille Institute of America, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2001

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In Re Estate of RegliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API