Legal Opinion

Estate of Plumer

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 16, 1958No. Civ. 22821PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFourt, J.

This is an appeal by the petitioner from that portion of an order and decree determining heirship and interest in estate which decrees that the residue of the estate should be distributed to the persons named in the will, and not to the petitioner and Andrew E. Perkins, first cousins of the deceased, who are not named in the will.

The decedent died on March 3, 1955, in Los Angeles County, leaving surviving her as her only heirs at law, two first cousins, namely the petitioner and Andrew E. Perkins. The decedent left a holographic will consisting of three pages, one of which pages was titled…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Church Home for Children of Protestant Episcopal Church v. LawrenceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. McConnell v. DoolittleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  3. In Re Estate of UphamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Allen v. Cal. Mut. Bldg & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  5. In Re Estate of TooleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Cummings v. CummingsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  2. Estate of CrickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  3. Estate of WiemerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  4. Soady v. First National BankNevada Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Estate of BatemanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962

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