Barusch v. Brainard
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtHunt, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). In the absence of a statute an executor cannot be held as garnishee in respect to a legacy of money bequeathed by his testator. Shin on Attachment, § 510; Drake on Attachments, §§ 492, 501; Colby v. Coates, 6 Cush. (Mass.) 558; Hudson v. Wilber, 114 Mich. 116, 72 N. W. 162, 47 L. R. A. 345, 68 Am. St. Rep. 465; Norton v. Clark, 18 Nev. 247, 2 P. 529; Whitehead v. Coleman, 31 Grat. (Va.) 784. The underlying reason of the decisions is that prior to a decree of distribution the estate is in the custody of the law, not subject to attachment which would delay…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Byers v. McAuleySupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Martinovich v. MarsicanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Dunsmoor v. FurstenfeldtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- In re Estate NeracCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- In Re Estate of HoweCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Estate of LawrenceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Fount-Wip, Inc. v. GolsteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- Estate v. Joya, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- United California Bank v. LawrenceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Estate of CasserleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2018
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.