In re Estate of Pearsons
California Supreme Court
MOTION in the Supreme Court by Respondents to dismiss an appeal from a decree of distribution of the estate of a deceased person, rendered in the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. J. Y. Coffey, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Fleet, J.
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a decree of final distribution, on the ground that it was prematurely taken.
Section 1704 of the Code of Civil Procedure requires that all orders and decrees in probate proceedings “must be entered at length in the minute book of the court”; and section 1715 of said code provides that an appeal “must be taken within sixty days after the order, decree, or judgment is entered.” A decree is entered within the meaning of the last section when it is “entered at length in the minute-book of the court,” as provided in section 1704; and an appeal taken before such…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In re the Estate of RoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Home for the Care of Inebriates v. KaplanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Menzies v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by18 opinions
- Estate of Hanley v. HanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Estate of KennedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- In re Estate of ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Banfield v. SchuldermanOregon Supreme Court · 1931
- Baldwin v. Santa Rosa Island Co.California Supreme Court · 1904
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.