Harlan v. Peck
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. This was an action for the possession of portions of Fifty Vara Lots Numbers Two Hundred and Ninety and Two Hundred and Ninety-One, situate in the City and County of San Francisco.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. This was an action for the possession of portions of Fifty Vara Lots Numbers Two Hundred and Ninety and Two Hundred and Ninety-One, situate in the City and County of San Francisco. The plaintiffs sue in the representative capacity of administrators of the estate of George Harlan, deceased, who was seized in fee of the demanded premises at the time of his death, which occurred July 8th, 1850, deceased then being a resident of that portion of Santa Clara County which in 1855 was incorporated into…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Sanderson, J.:
The language of the one hundred and ninetieth section of the Probate Act is as follows:
“Ho action.for the recovery of any real estate sold by an executor or administrator under the provisions of this Chapter shall be maintained by any heir or other person claiming under the deceased testator or intestate, unless it be commenced within three years next after the sale.”
"Whether this language embraces sales which are made under orders of the Probate Courts which are void for the want of jurisdiction or only such sales as are merely voidable, is the question.
There is…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Sandlin v. BarkerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Dennis v. BintCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Meeks v. OlphertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- O'Keefe v. BehrensSupreme Court of Kansas · 1906
- Dodson v. MiddletonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.