Legal Opinion

Hill v. Badeljy

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 8, 1930No. Docket No. 7325PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PRESTON (H. L.), J., pro tem.

The plaintiff, Albert E. Hill, as administrator with the will annexed of the estate of Stivi Svicarevich, deceased, brought this action to recover from defendant John Badeljy the sum of $7,000, alleging that said money belonged to the estate of the above-named deceased.

The case was tried before the court without a jury and judgment was entered in favor of' the defendant. From this judgment plaintiff prosecutes this appeal.

Stivi Svicarevich, the deceased, will be hereafter referred to as “Steve.”

The facts are not in serious dispute and are briefly these: Steve…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Chase v. TroutCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  2. People v. . TurnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  3. Suckow v. AldersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Kennedy v. McMurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  5. In Re Estate of HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. State Board of Equalization v. ColeMontana Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Wallace v. RileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  3. Paterson v. ComastriCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Young v. YoungCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Wallace v. RileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937

29 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