Blanc v. Rodgers

California Supreme Court

Blanc v. Rodgers

47 Cal. 606

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1874

DocketNo. 3,849

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 47 Cal. 606 (Blanc v. Rodgers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Blanc v. Rodgers, 47 Cal. 606 (Cal. 1874).

Pincite

Opinion

Chief Justice Wallace, speaking for the Court, said:

We are of opinion that whatever interests Mrs. Bodgers has in the property in suit, or its proceeds, must be first [608]*608asserted in some Court having original jurisdiction of such matters. The case of Senter v. De Bernal, relied upon by counsel, was an action for partition governed by rules peculiar to actions of that character, and does not apply to a case like this. We cannot entertain the motion of a stranger to the record to dismiss an appeal. Motion denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Chief Justice Wallace, speaking for the Court, said:

We are of opinion that whatever interests Mrs. Bodgers has in the property in suit, or its proceeds, must be first [608]*608asserted in some Court having original jurisdiction of such matters. The case of Senter v. De Bernal, relied upon by counsel, was an action for partition governed by rules peculiar to actions of that character, and does not apply to a case like this. We cannot entertain the motion of a stranger to the record to dismiss an appeal. Motion denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 Cal. 606, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blanc-v-rodgers-cal-1874.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack