General
Estate of EDGAR LAURENCE DOW, Deceased. MAXINE PATRICIA HUTCHINSON, Respondent, v. MAXINE B. DOW, Individually and as Administratrix With the Will Annexed, etc., Appellants
140 Cal. App. 2d 957297 P.2d 38·District Court of Appeal of the State of California·1956·CA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
297 P.2d 38]
[Civ. No. 17057.
First Dist., Div. One.
Apr. 2, 1956.]
Estate of EDGAR LAURENCE DOW, Deceased. MAXINE PATRICIA HUTCHINSON, Respondent, v. MAXINE B. DOW, Individually and as Administratrix With the Will Annexed, etc., Appellants.
J. Oscar Goldstein, P. M. Barceloux, J. Burton Goldstein, Goldstein, Barceloux & Goldstein, Erskine, Erskine & Tulley and Morris Erskine II, for Appellants.
William A. White and Hutchinson & Quattrin for Respondent.
[MAJORITY — WOOD (Fred B.), J.]
WOOD (Fred B.), J.
The appeal herein is from an order of September 7, 1955, which is described in our opinion this day filed in Dow v. Superior Court, No. 1 Civil 16939, ante, p. 399 [297 P.2d 30].
Respondent herein has moved to dismiss the appeal upon the asserted ground that the order in question is nonappealable. We hold that those provisions of the order which direct the payment of money or the distribution of property are appealable for the reasons stated in our opinion in No. 16939.
The motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.
Peters, P. J., and Bray, J., concurred.
Respondent’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied May 29, 1956.