In re Estate of Scott

California Supreme Court
In re Estate of Scott, 15 Cal. 220 (Cal. 1860)
Baldwin

In re Estate of Scott

Opinion of the Court

Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Cope, J. concurring.

The petition for a mandamus is denied. The Probate Court of Santa Clara had jurisdiction, of which it could not divest itself, and vest the jurisdiction in the Probate Court of San Francisco county, upon the facts in the record.

These proceedings for the settlement of an estate, and matters connected therewith, are not civil actions within the meaning of the Practice Act, secs. 18 to 21. The Judge of the Probate Court of San Francisco county was right in remanding the cause to the Probate Court of Santa Clara; who will proceed to act in the premises as if no order for the removal of the papers and the matter had been made.

Reference

Full Case Name
ESTATE OF CHARLES G. SCOTT
Cited By
6 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
S. bibs out of the State, leaving property in Santa Clara county, and the Probate Court thereof takes jurisdiction of the estate and grants letters of administration to K. The widow subsequently files a petition to revoke the letters, on the ground that the Probate Court of San Francisco ought to have issued them, whereupon the Administrator asks the Court to transfer the cause to that Court, representing that the widow and a majority of the witnesses resided there, and that the interest of several persons interested in the estate would be advanced by the transfer, to which both parties agreed. The Court made an order of transfer. The Probate Court of San Francisco, on the papers being filed therein, refused to take jurisdiction of the cause, and ordered the papers back. Held, that on these facts, the Probate Court of Santa Clara could not divest itself of jurisdiction and vest it in the Probate Court of San Francisco, and that mandamus will not issue to compel the latter Court to take jurisdiction. The proceedings for the settlement of an estate, and matters connected therewith, are not civil actions within the meaning of sections eighteen to twenty-one of the Practice Act.