Legal Opinion
Christman v. Doyle
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 28, 1932No. Docket No. 8599PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ATTERIDGE, J., pro tem.
The present appeal is from the final decree of distribution entered in the estate of one Thomas Patrick Doyle, deceased. In the said decree the trial court found and adjudged that the respondents were either directly or in due course of legal representation first cousins of the deceased, and as such his next of kin and legal heirs. It also further found that appellant’s testator, Leonard J. Meehan, was a second cousin of said Thomas Patrick Doyle, hut was not his next of kin nor, under our laws of succession, his next immediate legal heir. Leonard Meehan died shortly…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gay v. TorranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Taylor v. Savings Union Bank & Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
- Kienlen v. HoltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Estate of WaldenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Gassen v. HendrickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Department of Mental Hygiene v. DunhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Gammell v. GammellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Estate of CavnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Kirkwood v. American Friends of the Hebrew UniversityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Department of Mental Hygiene v. DunhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.