Hammond v. Crabtree

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 360·4 Cal. App. 4th 1119·6 Cal. Rptr. 2d 224·92 Daily Journal DAR 3817·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2442
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 20, 1992D013697California2,051 words

Opinion

Opinion

Benke, J.

Because we find the appellant’s notice of appeal was not timely filed, we dismiss her appeal.

Facts and Procedural Background

Appellant Virginia C. Hammond (Virginia) is the daughter of Genevieve N. Crabtree (Genevieve). Following Genevieve’s death on December 6, 1986, Virginia petitioned to probate a 1977 will and four later codicils executed by her mother.

Respondents Daniel B. Crabtree (Daniel) and Polly Crabtree (Polly) are Genevieve’s grandchildren. They filed a will contest in which they alleged the codicils were invalid because they were made as a result of undue influence exercised by Virginia. In a separate complaint Daniel and Polly, joined by another grandchild, Hodge N. Crabtree III, sought to impose a constructive trust on deposit accounts which named Virginia as beneficiary in the event of Genevieve’s death and on one account which Genevieve and Virginia held as joint tenants.

The will contest and constructive trust action were consolidated by order of the trial court. Trial of the consolidated action commenced on September . 19, 1990. The parties concluded their evidentiary presentations on September 24, 1990, and following submission of written briefs,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.