Legal Opinion

Camacho v. Balasquide

Supreme Court of Puerto Rico

Decided May 29, 1913No. 836Published

Appeal from the District Court of San Juan, .Section 2. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice MacLeary

On January 30, 1911, an amended complaint was filed herein in the District Court of San Juan, by which the minor, Enrique Camacho, represented by his mother and defender, Martina Camacho, maintained an action against Antonio Ba-lasquide Grómez, brother of Ramón Balasquide Grómez, asking that he, the said Enrique Camacho, be declared to be the natural and acknowledged son of Ramón Balasquide Grómez and his sole heir, in default of á last will and testament.

He bases his suit on the following grounds:

First. — That Ramón Balasquide Grómez and Martina Camacho, both unmarried, publicly and openly…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Fraser v. JennisonMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  2. Pearsall v. HenryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Powers v. McKenzieTennessee Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Quinn v. HigginsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
  5. International & Great Northern Railway Co. v. MillsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903

7 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