Legal Opinion
Bambridge v. Westerman
California Supreme Court
Decided February 26, 1968No. S. F. 22359PublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.
Appellant Frank L. Bambridge appeals from a judgment (Prob. Code, § 1240) 1 entered in proceedings for the determination of heirship (§§ 1080-1082) decreeing that appellant is entitled to no part of the estate of William Harry Westerman, Sr., deceased, under his claim thereto based on section 229 as the son of decedent’s previously deceased spouse.
The facts are not in dispute. In 1903 decedent married Jane Dwyer Bambridge (Jane), the mother of appellant by a former marriage. Two children were born issue of the marriage of decedent and Jane; William Harry Westerman, Jr., who died unmarried and…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Ward v. TaggartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- Siberell v. SiberellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Ernst v. SearleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Panopulos v. MaderisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Stark v. CokerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Bertero v. National General Corp.California Supreme Court · 1974
- Flatley v. MauroCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Continental Baking Co. v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Pool v. City of OaklandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
- Carmichael v. ReitzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.