Legal Opinion

Estate of Hittell

California Supreme Court

Decided December 26, 1903No. S.F. No. 3490PublishedCited by 34 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

McFARLAND, J.—

The deceased died testate', and this appeal is by heirs at law from a decree of distribution by which the whole of the estate is distributed to the respondent, Anna P. Greer, a devisee named in the will. The contention of appellants is, that only one undivided one half of the property of the deceased went to the respondent under the will, and that the other half was undisposed of and vested in the heirs at law, and this contention must be sustained.

There was before the trial court a photographic copy of the will, and it is in the record on appeal. It is contended by appellants…

2Cited by34 opinions

  1. Estate of RussellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Hembree v. QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  3. In Re Estate of HendersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  4. In Re Estate of MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Hagood v. HagoodCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916

29 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