Estate of Brady
Before: Shaw
Synopsis
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Metson, Drew & Mackenzie, and E. H. Ryan, for Appellants.
Walter H. Linforth, and Charles F. Hanlon, for Respondents.
SHAW, J.
This is an appeal from an order appointing the respondents administratrices of the estate of William J. Brady, deceased.
Brady died in the city and county of San Francisco, on April 11, 1917. The respondents Elizabeth F. Brophy and Gabrielle G. Traynor, daughters of said decedent, filed a petition in the San Francisco superior court, asking that they be appointed administratrices of said estate. The appellants Edward R. Brady, a son, and Mary L. Hyde, a
[538]
daughter of said decedent, appeared in opposition to the application, and alleged that at the time of the death of said decedent he was not a resident of the city and county of San Francisco, but was a resident of the county of Marin, and that in consequence thereof the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco had no jurisdiction of the estate. .The only question presented upon this appeal is whether or not the said decedent was a resident of San Francisco or a resident of the city of Boss in the county of Marin. The finding of the court was that he was a resident of San .Francisco, and thereupon letters were issued to the respondents as prayed for. The substance of the evidence may be briefly stated.
For some twenty years prior to his death Brady had owned a house which he occupied as a home, at 182 Devisadero Street, in San Francisco, and another house situated in the city of Boss in the county of Marin, which he also occupied as a home, spending five of six months of each year during the winter in San Francisco, and five or six months during the summer in Boss. Until the year 1914 he claimed the city of San Francisco as his residence, and registered as a voter and voted there. His habit of life during all these years was as above stated, to live about half of each year in San Francisco, and the other half in Boss. During the time he lived in San Francisco he frequently went to Boss at weekends, and remained there a day or two, returning then to San Francisco. It was also his habit while he stayed in San Francisco, to go to Boss each day and return to San Francisco in the evening. He kept a large part of his clothing in Boss while sleeping in San Francisco. In July, 1914, he had his registration in San Francisco canceled, and registered as a voter in Marin County, stating in his affidavit for that purpose that his residence was at the city of Boss. He had nine children, including the two respondents, seven of whom resided in and about San Francisco. * The two respondents did not testify. The other five children living near San Francisco testified as witnesses, declaring that at the time of changing his registration, and afterward, the decedent repeatedly said to them that he had changed his residence from San Francisco to Boss with the purpose of becoming a citizen of Boss. In pursuance of this intent, and under this registration, he voted at Boss in that year at the
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)