Updegraff v. Trask

18 Cal. 458, 1861 Cal. LEXIS 232
California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1861·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Baldwin J. delivered the opinion of the Court.

Cope, J. concurring.

The principal question in this case is, whether the heir can maintain ejectment for realty left by the ancestor, a considerable period elapsing after the. death, and no administration having been taken on the estate and there being no debts.

We think, independent of other qualification than the fact that no administration exists upon the estate, that the heir may maintain this action. He has a right of entry, subject only to the claim of the administrator, when there is one. This follows from his general title cast by the descent, which is only qualified by the particular statutory right given the administrator. (See Beckett v. Selover, 7 Cal. 216; see also Bufford v. Holliman, 10 Texas, 564, where the subject is fully discussed under a not dissimilar statute of that State.)

It is not necessary to notice other points.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Updegraff v. Trask, 18 Cal. 458, 1861 Cal. LEXIS 232 (Cal. 1861).

18 Cal. 458 (Updegraff v. Trask) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gossage v. Crown Point Gold & Silver Mining Co.
14 Nev. 153 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1879)
Smith ex rel. Smith v. Shrieves
13 Nev. 303 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1878)
Chapman v. Hollister
42 Cal. 462 (California Supreme Court, 1871)
Noe v. Card
14 Cal. 576 (California Supreme Court, 1860)