Washington v. Black

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 681·83 Cal. 290·23 P. 300
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 1, 1890No. 13479California1,852 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thornton, J.

James Moore died in 1884, leaving a will, which was afterward duly admitted to probate in Yolo County. He died possessed of a large estate. By *291 his will he bequeathed, among other things, a handsome estate to his wife, the defendant, Mary A. Black, who since his death has married her co-defendant, James R. Black. He also bequeathed to her all of his personal property, in trust, to pay his debts, funeral expenses, and costs of administration, and the remainder of this personal property to her.

He devised to his daughter, Martha Washington, in fee, the south half of section 11, township 9 north, range 1 west, Mount Diablo meridian, saving and excepting about ten acres, etc.

The defendant Mary A. was appointed, qualified, and acted as executrix, and administered the estate under the will. The personal property demised to her in trust was more than sufficient to pay the testator’s debts, funeral expenses, and the expenses of administration.-

While the defendant Mary was executrix she received in the year 1885, as rents, issues, and profits of the land devised as above mentioned to the plaintiff, the following sums: $2,652.82 on the fourteenth day of August, 1885, from the sale…

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.