Legal Opinion

Kinley v. Largent

California Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1921No. L. A. No. 5848PublishedCited by 28 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Fred H. Taft, Judge. Reversed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtLawlor, J.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff, Mrs. Anna Kinley, from a judgment which she recovered from the administrator of the estate of James Kinley, deceased. The decedent and appellant were husband and wife.

The action was brought to recover the sum of $3,444, which appellant had turned over to decedent for investment in street bonds. Up to the time of his death he had made no report on the investment. Appellant presented a demand to the administrator for the said sum, which was disallowed upon the ground that under subdivision 3, section 1880 of the Code of Civil Procedure, appellant was…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Roche v. WareCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Chase v. EvoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1877
  3. Colburn v. ParrettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
  4. Rose v. Southern Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1918

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Lohman v. LohmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. McClenahan v. KeyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Hartley v. BohrerIdaho Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Deacon v. BryansCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  5. Deacon v. BryansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931

23 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