Legal Opinion

In re Rose's Estate

California Supreme Court

Decided December 29, 1888No. 12,408PublishedCited by 1 opinion

APPEAL from Superior Court, Tulare County ,• W. W. Cross, Judge.

1Per curiam

This is an appeal by an administrator from a decree settling his account. When the account was rendered, written grounds of contest were filed; and after trial, at which witnesses were examined, the judge of the superior court made findings and a decree whereby it was adjudged that the account presented was not correct, and that the administrator owed the estate more money than the balance of his account showed. The appeal was taken within sixty days after the entry of the decree, but not within sixty days after the announcement of the decision and the filing of the findings. There was no…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mogk v. PetersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Bettis v. TownsendCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
  3. Clark v. GridleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
  4. Handley v. FiggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re Writ of Habeas Corpus in behalf of SchantzNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API