IN RE: MITCHELL'S ESTATE. (1938)

Supreme Court of California.

IN RE: MITCHELL'S ESTATE. REEVE et al. v. PHILLIPS et al.

S. F. 15643.

Decided: March 09, 1938

Bohnett, Hill, Cottrell & Boccardo, of San Jose, for appellants. Henry E. Monroe and Julia M. Easley, both of San Francisco, and L. F. Hobbs and Edward M. Fellows, both of San Jose, for respondents.

The portion of the decision filed herein which affirms the judgment of the court to the effect that parcel 5 is distributable to John W. Mitchell in fee is not to be construed as relieving that parcel or the proceeds from any sale thereof from the burdens to which under the law the same may be subject as a portion of the residue. The intent in affirming the decree as to that parcel was to end the controversy concerning whether it was a portion of the residue, or was distributable to Mitchell for life. The question of who is entitled to the proceeds from the sale of said parcel should await the court's decision upon retrial.

The petition for modification is denied.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network