In Re Estate of O'Hare
Before: Melvin
Synopsis
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
MELVIN, J.
Margaret O’Hare, the executrix, appeals in several capacities from a decree of distribution which, among other provisions, gives to Michael O’Hare, brother of testator, in addition to a legacy of five hundred dollars, one-fourth of the .residue of the estate, and to the children of Martin O’Hare, a deceased nephew, his share under the will.
Appellant’s counsel made two motions: One, under section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was to be permitted to file a bill of exceptions, as he, not realizing that his notice of appeal was a waiver of his right to a notice of decision, had allowed his time to file a bill of exceptions to pass, while awaiting such notice of decision. This motion was denied. The other motion was one to amend and substitute a judgment and decree for the one entered. It also was denied. There is, therefore, no record to support the objections made by appellant.
There appears in the transcript, however, that which purports to be a copy of the will. It contains the following provisions, among others:
“I give and bequeath to my brother, Michael 0’Hare (also spelled 0 ’Heher in Ireland), residing at Inchaboy, Postoffice,
[115]
Gort, County Galaway, Ireland, the sum of five hundred dollars. . . .
“All the rest, residue and remainder of my said estate I give, devise and bequeath to my said nieces, Mary Reilly and Bridget O’Hare, and my nephews, Martin O’Hare, John O’Hare and Michael O’Hare, share and share alike.”
Specifically, the part of the decree to which appellant objects is as follows: ‘1 The court finds that the brother, Michael O’Hare, is entitled, in addition to the five hundred dollars money legacy bequeathed to him, to one-fourth of the residue of said estate; and the court finds that John O’Hare, Mary A. O’Hare, Joseph O’Hare, and Catherine O’Hare, the four children of and all of the children of Martin O’Hare, deceased nephew of decedent, are entitled to take of said estate the share to which their father, the said nephew, Martin 0 ’Hare, would have been entitled, if living, to wit, a general legacy of one thousand dollars and one-fourth of the residue of said estate, after the other general.legacies are paid.”
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)