In re Estate of Fallon

Good Law
4 Coffey 450
Superior Court of California, County of San FranciscoJune 5, 1886No. 4716California336 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Coffey, J.

The motion of Henry Kenitzer and D. S. Payne, proponents in the above-entitled matter, by their counsel, William Matthews, Esq., to strike out the bill of costs filed on the twelfth day of May, A. D. 1886, by and on behalf of the contestants of the will in the above-entitled matter for costs and disbursements incurred and expended by the contestants on the trial of the contest over the alleged will of Thomas Fallon, deceased, coming on regularly to be heard, and counsel having been duly heard, and said matter having been submitted, and the premises having been duly considered, and it appearing to the court that the proponents, Henry Kenitzer and D. S. Payne, have not, and that each of them has not within five days after the notice of the filing of said bill *451 of costs filed or made a motion to have the same taxed hy the above-entitled court or by the judge thereof, and that the time to file or make a motion to tax said costs or to retax the same has expired without any such motion being made by any party or person interested in said estate or by said proponents or either of them.

And it further appearing that the proponents continued the contest over said alleged will after it…

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.