Leonis v. Leffingwell
California Supreme Court
APPEALS from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County denying a motion to amend a judgment and from an order in probate rejecting-the judgment as a claim against the estate of a deceased person. W. H. Clark, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.
—These two appeals were argued and submitted and will he considered together.
No. 641 is an appeal by defendant Leffingwell from an order denying her motion to have a judgment in her favor amendedj and No. 642 is an appeal by said Leffingwell from an order in probate rejecting said judgment as a claim against the estate of said Jean Leonis, deceased. If the order refusing to amend the judgment in No. 641 was right, as we think it was, then the order in No. 642 rejecting the judgment as a claim against the estate was also right, and both orders should" be affirmed.
The facts in No. 641 are…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Morrison v. DapmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853
- Reay v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
3Cited by8 opinions
- Sherman Bros. v. PotterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Haynes v. Los Angeles Railroad Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1927
- Los Angeles Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Corp. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
- In Re Jennings' EstateMontana Supreme Court · 1927
- Albori v. SykesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.