Legal Opinion
Bias v. Reed
California Supreme Court
Decided December 17, 1914No. S.F. No. 6485PublishedCited by 63 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
A hearing in Bank of this cause was ordered after judgment in Department One.
Upon further consideration of the questions involved we have reached the conclusion that the views heretofore expressed in Department are correct, and the Department opinion is hereby adopted as the opinion of the court in Bank. For the reasons stated in that opinion, the judgment is affirmed.
The following is a copy of the opinion of Department One:
“This is an action by the administrator, with the will annexed, of the estate of Elizabeth Reed, deceased, against the administrator, with the will annexed, of…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Oscanyan v. Arms Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Liverpool, New York & Philadelphia Steamship Co. v. Commissioners of EmigrationSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Boggs v. Merced Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1859
- Moore v. TrottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Kenney v. ParksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- Huber v. HuberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Uccello v. LaudenslayerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- See v. SeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- Cox v. SchnerrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Hotaling v. HotalingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.