In Re Estate of Wilson
California Supreme Court
Siemon & Garber £ I. P. Chapman and H. Ray Bailey for Respondents. Brittan & Brittan, for Respondent Administrator.
1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.
This is a motion to dismiss an appeal in a probate proceeding. The motion is made on the ground that the order is not appealable and on the further ground that the appeal was not taken within the time provided by law.
By order duly made on March 18, 1924, the public administrator of Kern county was appointed administrator of said estate. In the petition for letters of administration it was stated that the heirs of the deceased were unknown. On May 8, 1924, notice was served on the administrator -that Alfred Edward Stay, Frederick Charles Stay, Mary Victoria Robbins and Ada Stay Penney claimed…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- William Hill Co. v. LawlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- More v. MoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- In re the Estate of WittmeierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- In Re Estate of AllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- In Re Estate of SchmiererCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Estate of Simmons v. TownsendCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- Estate of GrussingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- McPherson v. MissamoreCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- United States v. CaliforniaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1956
- County First National Bank v. O'NeillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.