Grinbaum v. Superior Court

192 Cal. 783
California Supreme Court·Decided December 17, 1923·No. S. F. No. 10685·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

WILBUR, C. J.

We have this day rendered decisions holding that the guardian of the person and the guardian of the estate of Julie Grinbaum were appointed by void orders. We have, also, held that by reason of these decisions it is unnecessary to pass upon the qualifications of the judge to try the proceedings for restoration to capacity because the respective proceedings for the appointment of the respective guardians of the person and estate were void and that the proceedings for restoration- to capacity based upon the validity of such orders of appointment must fall with the orders appointing the respective guardians. For the same reason it is unnecessary to issue a mandamus to compel the respondent judge to make an order for the taking of the depositions of certain individuals to be used upon the trial of the pending application of Julie Grinbaum for restoraton to capacity.

Petition dismissed.

Lawlor, J., Lennon, J., Kerrigan, J., Waste, J., and Myers, J., concurred.

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

Grinbaum v. Superior Court, 192 Cal. 783 (Cal. 1923).

192 Cal. 783 (Grinbaum v. Superior Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

George v. Beaty
260 P. 386 (California Court of Appeal, 1927)