In Re Estate of Morhoff
Before: Melvin
Synopsis
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco denying a motion to set aside an order appointing a guardian. Thomas F. Graham, Judge. Affirmed.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
MELVIN, J.
William C. Morhoff, father of a minor child, Elenora Morhoff, appeals from an order denying his motion to set aside an order previously made appointing Julia Farrell, an aunt of said Elenora, guardian of the minor’s person and estate. The grounds of the motion were lack of necessity for a guardian; fraud in procuring the appointment of Mrs. Farrell; that the father was entitled to be heard on
[596]
the necessity for the appointment of a
guardian;
and that the order was taken through the mistake, inadvertence, surprise and excusable neglect of the father. ,
The facts, in brief, are as follows: Appellant is in the United States Navy. He and Nora H. Brosnan intermarried in 1905. To them two children were born, one a boy, since deceased, the other the daughter, Blenora. Mrs. Morhoff was in ill health and lived at the home of her mother iñ San Francisco, where her little girl was born in 1908. Mr. Morhoff was absent much of the time in pursuit of his calling. Mrs. Morhoff died in 1909, and thereafter the child lived with the grandmother, Mrs. Brosnan. This was with the father’s full consent. Mrs. Brosnan died in the final week of 1916, leaving property, to one-third of which the little girl Blenora is entitled as an heir at law. Subsequently, Julia Farrell, the child’s'aunt, applied for letters of guardianship, averring in her petition, among other things, that Mr. Morhoff was a resident of Portland, Oregon, and that he had acquiesced in the appointment of Mrs. Farrell as guardian of said minor. Cornelius Brosnan, an uncle of the minor, residing in San Francisco, formally consented to the appointment of the petitioner.
At the hearing of this petition, and the láter proceeding upon motion to set aside the order appointing, a guardian, there was exhibited a letter written by Mr. Morhoff from Portland, Oregon, to Mr. Brosnan in San Francisco, expressing the writer’s gratitude to his brother-in-law and sister-in-law for their wishes in reference to the division of their mother’s property with their niece and containing the following language:
“Now Con in regards to a Guardian being appointed to look after Blenora’s share whatever it .'may be either you or Julia is satisfactory to me. Let me suggest that as neither Julia or you has had much experience in money matters that you will both confer with John in whom I have absolute confidence and who could put th.e money out to the best advantage. You will find me always ready and willing to sign anything you may both wish as I am for all of your good and don’t want a cent.”
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)