In re the Estate of Jessup
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Fox.
1Opinion
Beatty, C. J.,
I dissent. Reargument and ré-examination of this ease have convinced me that *435our former decision was correct, and have not materially changed my views as to the validity of the particular grounds upon which it was based. It is conceded—it would have been impossible to deny—that the proof of respondent’s paternity is complete. The only argument that can be made against his claim to inherit his father’s estate rests upon a strict construction of the statutes, remedial in their nature, designed to secure to innocent unfortunates in his situation a just share of the rights to which…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Sewall v. RobertsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- McCool v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1862
- Leese v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
- Bull v. CoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.