McAllister

McAllister v. Wells Fargo Bank & Union Trust Co.

Good Law
1935 Cal. LEXIS 325·2 Cal. 2d 283·40 P.2d 505
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 22, 1935S. F. No. 15255California550 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Waste, J.

Respondents, the executor of the estate and certain legatees of the deceased, moved to dismiss the appeal in this matter on the ground that the issues involved have become moot. The motion appears to be good.

From the record supporting the motion it appears that the appellant, an attorney at law, appeals from a decree of distribution made in the matter of the estate of the deceased. He is not a party interested in the estate, but, for a time, represented, as attorney, certain of the heirs of the deceased under a contract of employment, to secure which *284 these heirs assigned to him one-quarter of the total amount of their interest in the decedent’s property. Prior to the time when a decree of ratable distribution was made, these heirs discharged appellant as their attorney, and disputed his claim to the compensation mentioned in the contract of employment. In consequence, the court, by the decree, ■ set aside the moneys claimed by appellant for and as his compensation, directed the executor to hold in reserve such moneys, and reserved jurisdiction to determine the controversy over it.

Appellant appeals from that portion of the decree which withheld the moneys from him. It is…

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.