Legal Opinion
Giammarrusco v. Simon
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 12, 2009No. B199998PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MALLANO, P. J.
In this probate case, a trust provided that the surviving trustor could exercise a limited power of appointment over specified property in three ways: (1) “by a Will . . . duly admitted to probate,” (2) “by a . . . Codicil duly admitted to probate,” or (3) “by a written acknowledged instrument delivered to the Trustee.” The trust then stated, “[i]f no Will or Codicil purporting to be that of the Survivor is filed for probate within sixty (60) days of his or her death, it shall be conclusively presumed that the Survivor did not exercise this limited power of appointment.”…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Renee J. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- Doe v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- Torres v. Parkhouse Tire Service, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Burch v. GeorgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Villa De Las Palmas Homeowners Ass'n v. TerifajCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Radin v. Jewish National FundCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
- Mcmackin v. EhrheartCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Estate of O'Connor v. O'Connor, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Munn v. BriggsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Aviles v. Swearingen, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.