Morrow

Morrow v. Barker

Good Law
119 Cal. 65·1897 Cal. LEXIS 848·51 P. 12
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 12, 1897S. F. No. 865California724 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henshaw, J.

On October 25, 1895, the defendant, as the administrator with the will annexed, published notice to creditors in the estate of Susan Berg, deceased, directing all creditors to present their claims within four months after the first publication of the notice.

*66 January 2,1896, and before the time for presenting claims had expired, John Sundstrom died, without having presented his claim against the estate of Berg. February 20, 1896, letters of administration were duly issued to plaintiff on the estate of J ohn Sundstrom, deceased. February 25, 1896, the four months’ time specified in the notice to creditors of the estate of Berg expired, and the claim of Sundstrom had not been presented or allowed. March 6,1896, the claim upon which this action is based was duly made out as required by the statute, and on March 16th, ten days after the time for presentation had elapsed, was presented to the defendant, as the administrator of the estate of Susan Berg, for allowance. The claim was rejected by the administrator on the ground that it was not presented in time and was barred by the statute.

This action was brought upon the rejected claim. A demurrer to the complaint was interposed on…

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.