Miller v. Superior Court

Good Law
59 Cal. App. 334·210 P. 832
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 14, 1922Civ. No. 3950.California1,769 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Craig, J.

By this proceeding petitioner asks that the superior court named as respondent be enjoined from further action in a suit at law in which Frank M. Kelsey, special administrator of the estate of Mary Moore Miller, is plaintiff, and George H. Miller, Jared H. Miller, and Cecil A. Sheward Miller are defendants. The instant proceeding will be referred to as the “proceeding” and the action sought .to be enjoined as the “action.”

It is the theory of petitioner that the superior court has no jurisdiction to try the action. Many authorities are cited by both sides concerning certain legal phases of the ease as presented for our consideration. However, the controversy centers upon a determination of the nature of the action. Petitioner insists that it is a suit for an accounting against an executor; respondent avers that it is an ordinary action by an administrator to secure the possession and title of the property of the estate which he represents. If the action is determined to be as contended by respondent, clearly the injunction prayed for should not issue. We think that respondent’s contention is sound.

Mary Moore Miller and Mary B. Moore were one and the same person. So much of the…

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.