Legal Opinion

McCaughey v. Lyall

California Supreme Court

Decided January 14, 1908No. L.A. No. 1967PublishedCited by 11 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. McNutt & Hannon, and William G. Griffith, for Appellants.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.

George McCaughey died intestate on March 1, 1890. The plaintiffs are his children and heirs at law. Dpring his lifetime, on June 6, 1889, the deceased executed a mortgage on certain land to one H. J. Finger to secure a promissory note for five hundred dollars. which was due and unpaid at the death of the decedent. After his death, Susan McCaughey was duly appointed and qualified as administratrix of his estate. The note and mortgage were duly presented to the administratrix and were allowed by her and approved by the probate judge. In January, 1894, Finger commenced an action against the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cunningham v. AshleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Ex parte ToddCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Bayly v. MueheCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
  4. Dickey v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Finger v. McCaugheyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Klopstock v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Middlebrook v. PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Estate of ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Bernkrant v. FowlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Estate of JobsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912

6 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