Blythe v. Ayres
Citations
- 102 Cal. 254
- 36 P. 522
- 1894 Cal. LEXIS 630
Syllabus
<p>Estates op Deceased Persons—Contest op Heirship—Findings—Groups op Claimants—Appeal—“ Party Aggrieved.”—In a proceeding instituted by one claiming to be the daughter of a decedent for the contest of the heirship of his estate, under section 1664 of the Code of Civil Procedure, where numerous different groups of claimants appearing as defendants claim the right of heirship, their claims being mostly inconsistent with, and hostile to, each other; each group contending that the deceased was descended from parents different from those alleged by either of the other groups, if the court finds that the plaintiff is the daughter and sole heir of the deceased, and also finds that one group of claimants were related to the deceased as alleged in their answer, and that none of the other claimants were in anywise related to or akin to the deceased, and these findings are not assailed and overcome by another group of claimants, who have appealed, none of them is a “party aggrieved ” by the decision in favor of the daughter as sole heir of the deceased, and they cannot be prejudiced or aggrieved by any ruling made by the court in her favor, and have no standing as appellants from the decision and judgment in her favor.</p> <p>Id. —Conflicting Evidence—Review Upon Appeal—Paternity of Child. Where there is conflicting evidence as to the paternity of the child found to be the sole heir of the decedent, the decision of the trial judge upon that question of fact will not be reviewed upon appeal.</p> <p>Id.—Institution of Illegitimate Person as Heir—Construction of Code—Case Affirmed.—Blythe v. Ayers, 96 Cal. 532, affirmed as to the construction of section 1387 of the Civil Code, and as to the facts required to constitute an illegitimate child the heir of the decedent under that section.</p> <p>Id.—Competency of Witness to Acknowledgment of Paternity-Letters —Immaterial Omission in Findings.—Where it appears that a witness to the writing of letters by the decedent acknowledging the
Judges: McFarland
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- People v. DurrantCalifornia Supreme Court· 1897-03-03· cited 204×
- Estate of WoodwardCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1964-10-09· cited 30×
- Pueblo v. SuttonSupreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1911-03-31· cited 24×
- Bodine v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1962-11-08· cited 18×
- Weidenhoft v. PrimmWyoming Supreme Court· 1908-03-09· cited 16×
- Adams v. HodgkinsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine· 1912-09-30· cited 15×
- Hinckley v. AyresCalifornia Supreme Court· 1895-01-02· cited 13×
- Blythe v. AyresCalifornia Supreme Court· 1895-11-30· cited 13×
- Madruga v. Borden Co.California Court of Appeal· 1944-02-29· cited 11×
- Coleman v. WalkerCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1954-08-19· cited 11×
- Davis v. HinckleyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1895-11-30· cited 10×
- Hurd v. WalkerCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1935-10-17· cited 7×
- Wagner v. First Church of Christ Scientist of Laguna BeachCalifornia Supreme Court· 1957-09-20· cited 7×
- Estate of TorranceCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1957-10-11· cited 7×
- Blythe Co. v. HinckleyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1896-05-22· cited 6×
- Shelley v. BassoCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1947-05-20· cited 6×
- Estate of BrisselCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1963-08-02· cited 5×
- Hebrew Home for Aged Disabled v. FriedmanCalifornia Supreme Court· 1918-03-25· cited 1×
- Burkett v. DaltonCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1957-10-11· cited 1×
- Lingle v. National FoundationCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1963-08-02· cited 1×
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.