Legal Opinion

Mallarino v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 5, 1953No. Civ. 15570PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNourse, P. J.

Petitioners allege they are beneficiaries under the will of George Anthony Kearns, who left all his estate to his fiancée Emma Traung Hammersmith and made her executrix of Ms will, but in a separate provision directed her to provide for the petitioners, his nieces. The executrix petitioned the superior court for instructions as .to the interpretation of this provision. That court held that the words were precatory. On appeal this court held them to be mandatory. The Supreme Court took over and held that the clause was of uncertain meaning and that the superior court had erred in refusing to…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Rescue Army v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Bright v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Mallarino v. HammersmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Davis v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Clippinger v. BreartonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Mihans v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  3. Turlock Golf & County Club v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  4. In Re Hofmann's EstateMontana Supreme Court · 1957
  5. In re BanschbachMontana Supreme Court · 1958

8 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