Kirschner v. Dietrich
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. J. M. Seawell,, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
In an action for divorce against the appellant, brought by his wife, Filomen Dietrich, service of the summons was made by publication, and judgment of divorce was entered July 13, 1893. The plaintiff in the action died February 22, 1894, and on June 8, 1894, upon an ex parte motion in behalf of the defendant, the court ordered that the administrator of the plaintiff be substituted as plaintiff in place of the deceased, and directed that the action be continued in his name. Thereafter the defendant, upon notice to the administrator, moved the court to vacate the judgment, and that he be…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- De Godey v. GodeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
3Cited by50 opinions
- Brown v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- McGuinness v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Taylor v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Coats v. CoatsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- In Re Estate of BrixCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.