Chiapella v. County Nat. Bank Etc. Co.

California Supreme Court Mar 7, 1933 No. Docket No. L.A. 13891.Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. A suit upon a rejected claim against an estate is a transitory civil action rather than an exercise of probate jurisdiction, meaning it may be brought in a county other than where the estate is being probated.

Issues

Whether a suit upon a rejected claim constitutes an exercise of probate jurisdiction.
Whether a suit upon a rejected claim is a transitory action that may be tried outside the county of probate.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“A suit upon a rejected claim is not an exercise of probate jurisdiction.”

“Such a suit is also recognized as a transitory action. It follows the person of the defendant and may be tried in a county other than that wherein the estate is being probated.”

THE COURT.

The lower court dismissed this cause for want of jurisdiction.

[1] A suit upon a rejected claim is not an exercise of probate jurisdiction. The action is upon the contract and venue is determined as in other civil cases. (McLean v. Crow,88 Cal. 644, 647 [26 P. 596]; Gallagher v. McGraw, 132 Cal. 601 [26 P. 596].) Such a suit is also recognized as a transitory action. It follows the person of the defendant and may be tried in a county other than that wherein the estate is being probated. (Thompson v. Wood, 115 Cal. 301 [64 P. 1080].)

The order is affirmed.

*Page 504

Chiapella v. County Nat. Bank Etc. Co.

AI Brief

THE COURT.

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief