Legal Opinion
Hill v. Hill
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 24, 1972No. Civ. 38394PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
STEPHENS, J.
This action was commenced by the Prudential Insurance Company of America by its complaint in interpleader against the natural parents, of decedent (the appellants here) and against the legal widow of decedent (the respondent). Prudential’s complaint alleged the existence of a Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance Policy upon the life of decedent, acknowledged the amount owing thereunder, and requested the court to order defendants (the appellants and respondent here), who had all made claim to the proceeds, to litigate their claims. The appellants and the respondent both filed…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Overstreet v. North Shore Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Robert C. Sears and Lavonne Stern v. Karen AustinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1961
- Kendig v. KendigCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1948
- Candelario A. Aguilar v. United States of America and Frances G. AguilarCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- Mary M. Behrens v. United States of America, and Wilda L. DinnellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Coomer v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- Nadler v. California Veterans BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Jessie E. Coomer v. United States of America, Servicemen's Group Life Insurance and Prudential Life Insurance Company, Defendants-Third-Party v. Patricia Gay Coomer, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973