Legal Opinion

Davis v. Norberg

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 12, 1990No. G006505PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SONENSHINE, J.

We here decide whether a probate administrator’s surety may participate in a probate proceeding as an interested person (Prob. Code, § 48) 1 but without intervening (Code Civ. Proc., § 387). We conclude it may.

I

John and Marilyn Davis owned Hedberg Manufacturing Company, which produced Clean Power, a fuel detergent. In November 1980, Hed berg entered into an exclusive distributorship contract with Tord Norberg’s company, Tegenor. When John died, Marilyn was appointed administrator and special administrator with powers to continue to run Hedberg.

At the time of John’s death,…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Loring v. Town of KingsleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Estate of BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Fitzgerald v. HerzerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  4. Mitchell v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Smith v. Royal Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1960

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Yield Dynamics, Inc. v. TEA Systems Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2007
  2. O'Connor v. Old Republic Surety Co.California Court of Appeal · 1996
  3. Forrest v. Department of CorporationsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. Harris v. Northwestern National InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  5. Arman v. BANK OF AMERICA, NT & SACalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API