Wheelock v. Godfrey
Citations
- 100 Cal. 578
- 35 P. 317
- 1893 Cal. LEXIS 836
Syllabus
<p>Estates of Deceased Persons—Action by Executor to Set Aside Assignment of Pass Book—Equity—Jury Trial.—A complaint by the executor of a decedent which alleges that the decedent assigned his hank book to the defendant shortly before he died; that at the time of the assignment, if the same was ever in fact executed, he had been stricken with paralysis, was weak in body and mind, and mentally unsound and incompetent; that he lodged and hoarded at the house of the defendant, was subject to and under her influence, direction, and control, and that she fraudulently and by duress, menace, and undue influence induced and procured the deceased, in his enfeebled condition, to execute the assignment, and which prays for a judgment that the assignment be declared null and void, and set aside; that the assignment was not made by the decedent, and that the moneys be declared the property of the estate of the decedent, and that plaintiff have judgment therefor, states a case of equitable cognizance, which the plaintiff is not entitled to have tried by a jury.</p> <p>Id.—Evidence—Mental Sanity—Opinion of “Intimate Acquaintance”—Discretion.—The question as to whether or not a witness is an “intimate acquaintance,” within the meaning of section 1870 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows an intimate acquaintance to give his opinion respecting the mental sanity of a person, is addressed very largely to the discretion of the trial court, and its ruling will not be disturbed upon appeal, if the conclusion reached is one which can he reasonably entertained consistently with the idea of intimacy.</p> <p>Id.—Testimony of Physician as to Sanity of Patient—Waiver of Objection to Competency—Motion to Strike Out.—Where the physician who attended the decedent was put upon the stand by the plaintiff to describe his ailments, and testified, upon cross-examination, as to his mental status, and that he was thoroughly rational and competent, without, objection taken to such cross-examinatio
Judges: Searls
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
9 cases in this archive cite this case.
- People v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court· 1988-07-11· cited 365×
- City & County of San Francisco v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court· 1951-05-15· cited 240×
- The Atkins Corporation v. TournyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1936-04-30· cited 27×
- In re Estate of WaxCalifornia Supreme Court· 1895-03-11· cited 16×
- Estate of CazaurangCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1946-07-01· cited 13×
- Curtis v. Boquillas Land & Cattle Co.Arizona Supreme Court· 1904-03-20· cited 12×
- Wheelock v. GodfreyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1893-12-28· cited 2×
- Thomas v. GrayCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1946-07-01· cited 1×
- Flannery v. Central Brewing Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey· 1904-11-14
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Webber v. ClarkeCalifornia Supreme Court· 1887-10-31· cited 67×
- People v. PicoCalifornia Supreme Court· 1882-11-15· cited 44×
- Fish v. BensonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1886-12-18· cited 44×
- People v. LongCalifornia Supreme Court· 1872-04-15· cited 30×
- Cassidy v. SullivanCalifornia Supreme Court· 1883-10-30· cited 23×
- People v. SamarioCalifornia Supreme Court· 1890-06-12· cited 12×
- People ex rel. Clough v. LevyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1887-01-29· cited 9×
- Carpenter v. BaileyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1889-06-01· cited 9×
- People v. FineCalifornia Supreme Court· 1888-09-27· cited 7×
Other cases named Wheelock v. Godfrey
2 other CourtListener records share this case name.
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.