Legal Opinion
Jewell v. Pierce
California Supreme Court
Decided February 12, 1898No. S. F. No. 678PublishedCited by 20 opinions
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sonoma County. R. F. Crawford, Judge. ■ The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
The plaintiffs brought this action against the defendants to quiet their title to certain lands, described in the complaint. Sarah C. Pierce died seised of the lands in question Hovember 28, 1891, leaving a last will and testament bearing date November 15, 1884, containing the following provisions:
“2. I give, devise, and bequeath to my grandson, William S, Pierce, his heirs and assigns forever [certain property charged with the payment of certain legacies]; my said grandson, William S. Pierce to come into possession of said property so devised and bequeathed on his reaching the age of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Goad v. MontgomeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Crew v. PrattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- William Hill Co. v. LawlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Christal v. TresconyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by20 opinions
- Bacon v. BaconCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Shattuck v. ShattuckArizona Supreme Court · 1948
- Cunha v. HughesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Callnon v. WinrottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Miller v. PitmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.