Legal Opinion

Estate of Porter

California Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1900No. S.F. No. 1644PublishedCited by 19 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion. W. F. Cowan, D. E. McKinlay, and C. H. Pond, for Appellant.

1Opinion of the Court

HAYNES, C.

James Porter died intestate in the county of Sonoma in November, 1897, leaving an estate consisting of real and personal property, the latter being more than sufficient to pay all debts and liabilities of the estate and the costs and expenses of administration. He left, however, no known heirs, relatives, or other person who would be entitled to inherit his estate, and the court so found.

The court also found as follows: “That said real estate is expensive to properly maintain and manage; that a portion of the same is planted to vines which need the constant care and attention of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In re the Estate of WilmerdingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Brenham v. StoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
  3. People ex rel. Attorney-General v. RoachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  4. In re Estate of PackerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Klopstock v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Middlebrook v. PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Estate of BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Andrada v. KelseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  5. In Re Estate of KirbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912

14 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