Saar

Saar v. Shea

Good Law
1969 Cal. App. LEXIS 2113·274 Cal. App. 2d 786·79 Cal. Rptr. 484
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 14, 1969Civ. No. 26096California2,094 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Christian, J.

Juuli Poder died in Estonia (U.S.S.R.), leaving an estate comprising a savings account in a San Francisco bank. Certain Estonian heirs-at-law appeal from a decree distributing the estate to respondent Julius Pillman, a nephew now residing in Maine. 1 The appeal is founded on the contention that the failure of respondent public administrator to give notice to the heirs-at-law, as required by Probate Code section 328, deprived the court of jurisdiction to admit the purported will of the decedent to probate and to take any proceedings thereafter (citing Farmers etc. Nat. Bank v. Superior Court (1945) 25 Cal.2d 842 [ 155 P.2d 823 ]; Estate of Vollhaber (1967) 251 Cal.App.2d 145 [ 59 Cal.Rptr. 169 ]).

The petition for probate of will listed among the heirs the present appellants, giving their addresses simply as “Estonia. ’ ’ Notice of hearing was mailed to the following address: “Estonia, Care of June L. Barnum, Attorney, 233 Sansome Street, San Francisco, Calif. ’ ’ Receiving the notices, attorney Barnum promptly wrote to the public administrator, advising that she represented only Julius Pillman, the proponent of the will, and that she could not accept service on behalf 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.