United States of Amercia v. State
United States of Amercia v. State
Dissenting Opinion
I dissent. For the reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in the Estate of Lindquist, ante, p. 697 .[154 P.2d 879], this day filed, I am of the opinion that the decree herein should be affirmed.
Opinion of the Court
The legal issues to be considered in determining this ease are largely similar to those appearing in
As in the Lindquist case, both the State of California and the United States of America claim to be entitled to distribution of such funds under the terms of the statutes discussed in that case. The trial court decreed that distribution be made to the State of California, and from such decree the United States of America took this appeal. For the reasons set forth in the Estate of Lindquist, ante, page 697 [154 P.2d 879], and upon the authority of that case that portion of the decree appealed from which denied unconditionally the claim of the federal government tó the residue of the estate of decedent is reversed, and the probate court is directed to amend its decree to provide that such residue shall revert and be paid to the United States of America upon elapse of five years from the date of distribution if the same has not theretofore been claimed by any legal heir pursuant to the laws' of California.
Gibson, C. J., Shenk, J., Curtis, J., and Traynor, J., concurred.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Estate of PATRICK WALKER, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published