Chiapella v. County National Bank & Trust Co.

217 Cal. 503
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 7, 1933
DocketL. A. No. 13891
StatusPublished

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

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

Related

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
217 Cal. 503, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chiapella-v-county-national-bank-trust-co-cal-1933.