Estate of Allen

In Re Estate of Allen

Good Law
175 Cal. 356·1917 Cal. LEXIS 680·165 P. 1011
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 7, 1917L. A. No. 4964.California545 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sloss, J.

Hattie E. Allen, widow of the decedent, appealed from an order denying her petition for a decree that a homestead had vested in her. We have just given judgment affirming the order. (Estate of Allen, ante, p. 354, [ 165 Pac. 1010 ].) The opinion filed on that appeal shows that no reporter ’s transcript or hill of exceptions was brought up.

The present appeal has to do with the petitioner’s effort to secure such bill of exceptions. It appears that, for some reason, she failed to propose her bill within the time allowed, and then, upon due notice, applied to the court, under section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for relief from the consequences of such failure. • Her motion was based upon the ground of excusable neglect. The court denied the motion, and from the order of denial the widow now appeals.

The appeal cannot be considered. The order sought to be reviewed is not one from which an appeal lies. We have very recently (Estate of Spafford, ante, p. 52, [ 165 Pac. 1 ]) had occasion to reaffirm the well-settled rale that the appellate jurisdiction in probate matters extends only to such orders and judgments as are specified in the third subdivision of section 963 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.