McDaniel v. Pattison

California Supreme Court

McDaniel v. Pattison

32 P. 805, 98 Cal. 86, 1893 Cal. LEXIS 865

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedApril 1, 1893

Docket14280

StatusPublished

Cited by17 cases

This text of 32 P. 805 (McDaniel v. Pattison) 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

McDaniel v. Pattison, 32 P. 805, 98 Cal. 86, 1893 Cal. LEXIS 865 (Cal. 1893).

Pincite

Opinions

The Court. —

We are satisfied, with opinions filed and the conclusion reached by Department One when this case was before it for decision, and the judgment is therefore reversed.

In their petition for a rehearing respondents, claim that they are entitled to assert their rights as heirs, but it is evident from the pleadings, findings, and decree that the parties and the court below ¡proceeded upon the theory that plaintiffs were claiming as devisees and not as heirs. The decree therefore cannot be modified, but we think there is enough in the complaint to justify an order allowing the plaintiffs to amend their complaint? if they desire so to do, so as to assert any claim they may have by reason of their heirship.

The judgment and order are reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to allow the parties to amend their pleadings, if they be so advised.

Garoutte, J., McFarland, J., Paterson, J., Harrison, J.

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

The Court. —

We are satisfied, with opinions filed and the conclusion reached by Department One when this case was before it for decision, and the judgment is therefore reversed.

In their petition for a rehearing respondents, claim that they are entitled to assert their rights as heirs, but it is evident from the pleadings, findings, and decree that the parties and the court below ¡proceeded upon the theory that plaintiffs were claiming as devisees and not as heirs. The decree therefore cannot be modified, but we think there is enough in the complaint to justify an order allowing the plaintiffs to amend their complaint? if they desire so to do, so as to assert any claim they may have by reason of their heirship.

The judgment and order are reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to allow the parties to amend their pleadings, if they be so advised.

Garoutte, J., McFarland, J., Paterson, J., Harrison, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 P. 805, 98 Cal. 86, 1893 Cal. LEXIS 865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdaniel-v-pattison-cal-1893.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack