In re Estate of Pearsons

Good Law
119 Cal. 27·1897 Cal. LEXIS 838·50 P. 929
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 5, 1897S. F. No. 1032California582 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fleet, J.

Motion to dismiss an appeal from a decree of final distribution, on the ground that it was prematurely taken.

Section 1704 of the Code of Civil Procedure requires that all orders and decrees in probate proceedings “must be entered at length in the minute book of the court”; and section 1715 of said code provides that an appeal “must be taken within sixty days after the order, decree, or judgment is entered.” A decree is entered within the meaning of the last section when it is “entered at length in the minute-book of the court,” as provided in section 1704; and an appeal taken before such entry is premature and vests this court with no jurisdiction of the cause, and will be dismissed. (In re Rose, 72 Cal. 577; Home of Inebriates v. Kaplan, 84 Cal. 486 ; Menzies v. Watson, 105 Cal. 109 .)

The decree in this instance was signed by the judge November 24, 1896, and filed with the clerk on the following day, November 25th; but it was not entered in the minutes until December 14th following. The notice of appeal was served and filed November 30th, and the bond on appeal filed December 3, 1896. It thus appears that the appeal was perfected some eleven days prior to the entry 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.