From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Estate of Letellier

Supreme Court of California
Dec 12, 1887
74 Cal. 311 (Cal. 1887)

Opinion

         Department Two

         Appeal from a decree of the Superior Court of Alameda County directing the partial distribution of the estate of a deceased person.

         COUNSEL:

         The court had no jurisdiction to decree a partial distribution upon the petition of the executor. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1658; Estate of Marrey , 65 Cal. 287; Estate of Wright , 49 Cal. 550.)

         Stanly, Stoney & Hayes, for Appellants.

          George E. Lawrence, for Respondent Eugenie Couturier.

         E. J. & J. H. Moore, for Executor.


         JUDGES: Hayne, C. Belcher, C. C., and Foote, C., concurred.

         OPINION

          HAYNE, Judge

          [15 P. 848] This is an appeal from a decree of partial distribution, made upon the petition of the executor.

         The provision of the Code of Civil Procedure is as follows: --          " Sec. 1658. At any time after the lapse of four months from the issuing of letters testamentary or of administration, any heir, devisee, or legatee may present his petition to the court for the legacy or share of the estate to which he is entitled, to be given to him upon his giving bonds, with security, for the payment of his proportion of the debts of the estate."

         And the next section provides that "notice of the application must be given to the executor or administrator personally, and to all persons interested," etc.

         These sections are the only ones authorizing partial distribution to be made. It seems to us that they do not contemplate a petition by the executor, to whom it is of no concern whether an heir, devisee, or legatee, gets paid in advance, or not. There being no authority in the statute for the proceedings taken in the court below, it was unauthorized, and should be set aside.

         We think this point arises upon the record whether the decree of partial distribution is to be considered as a judgment or as an order.

         We therefore advise that the decree appealed from be reversed, and the cause remanded.

         The Court. -- For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the decree appealed from is reversed and cause remanded.


Summaries of

In re Estate of Letellier

Supreme Court of California
Dec 12, 1887
74 Cal. 311 (Cal. 1887)
Case details for

In re Estate of Letellier

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Estate of ALEXANDRE LETELLIER, Deceased

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Dec 12, 1887

Citations

74 Cal. 311 (Cal. 1887)
15 P. 847

Citing Cases

Alcorn v. Gieseke

It was so decided as to this very proceeding on partial distribution. (Alcorn v. Buschke, 133 Cal. 655, [ 66…

Breen v. Donnelly

(See Sheils v. Haley , 61 Cal. 157, and Smith v. Robarts, 8 West Coast Rep. 503.) But this is an action to…