Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Paramount Publix Corp. v. District Court
Montana Supreme Court
Decided July 6, 1931No. 6,895PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
A claim against an estate may be amended after the expiration of the time for presentation of claims. (Chinn Land LivestockCo. v. Stewart, 69 Colo. 598, 196 P. 189; In re Davis'Estate, 142 Minn. 187, 171 N.W. 778; Dubbs v. Haworth,102 Kan. 603, 171 P. 624; Estate of Hidden, 23 Cal. 362.)
Great liberality is permitted in allowing these amendments. (White v. Deering, 38 Cal.App. 516, 179 P. 401; Landis v. Woodman, 126 Cal. 454, 58 P. 857; Wise v. Outtrim, 139 Iowa, 192, 130 Am. St. Rep. 301, 117 N.W. 264; Westbay v.Gray, 116 Cal. 660, 48 P. 800; Chariton Nat. Bank v.Wicher, 163 Iowa, 571, 145…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- McDougald v. HuletCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Etchas v. OrenaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Westbay v. GrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Wise v. OuttrimSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Vanderpool v. VanderpoolMontana Supreme Court · 1914
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Boone v. BooneWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1941
- Brion v. BrownMontana Supreme Court · 1959
- Baker National Bank v. HendersonMontana Supreme Court · 1968
- State Ex Rel. Steinfort v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1940
- Gold v. KilleenArizona Supreme Court · 1937
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.