Chiapella v. County National Bank & Trust Co.

217 Cal. 503
California Supreme Court·Decided March 7, 1933·No. L. A. No. 13891·Published

Opinion

THE COURT.

The lower court dismissed this cause for want of jurisdiction.

A suit upon a rejected claim is not an exercise of probate jurisdiction. The action is. upon the contract and venue is determined as in other civil eases. (McLean v. Crow, 88 Cal. 644, 647 [26 Pac. 596] ; Gallagher v. McGraw, 132 Cal. 601 [26 Pac. 596].) Such a suit is also recognized as a transitory action. It follows the person of the defendant and may be tried in a county other than that wherein the estate is being probated. (Thompson v. Wood, ll5 Cal. 301 [64 Pac. 1080].)

The order is affirmed.

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

Chiapella v. County National Bank & Trust Co., 217 Cal. 503 (Cal. 1933).

217 Cal. 503 (Chiapella v. County National Bank & Trust Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gallagher v. McGraw
64 P. 1080 (California Supreme Court, 1901)
McLean v. Crow
26 P. 596 (California Supreme Court, 1891)