Legal Opinion

In Re Marshall

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 7, 1929No. Docket No. 1545PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This matter is before the court on petition for a writ of habeas corpus to determine as between petitioner, Frank Marshall, and respondents, Aileen H. Haremza and Donald Haremza, the right to the custody of Betty Nadine Anderson, a minor child, not related by blood to either petitioner or respondents.

The history of the case, as disclosed by the record, is as follows: On October 10, 1923, the minor, who lived with petitioner and respondent Aileen H. Haremza, was, by proceedings had in the probate court of the county of Wyandotte, state of Kansas, duly adopted by respondent Aileen II.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Nipp v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1912
  2. In Re GilleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  3. In Re HoltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
  4. In Re WenmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
  5. In Re FrazierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Foster v. FosterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  2. In Re MemmiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. In Re KyleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  4. In Re LivingstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Bourland v. WalkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964

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