Grady v. Porter
Synopsis
Stipulation in Probate Court.—The Probate Court has power to enforce the terms of a stipulation entered into by parties litigant before it in reference to a subject-matter of which the Court has jurisdiction.
Estoppel by Judgment of Probate Court.—The contestants of a will entered into a stipulation with the proponent thereof, and by the terms of the stipulation the contestants were, in effect, substituted as legatees and devisees—the proponent being the executor. The stipulation was duly filed, and was made the basis of the subsequent proceedings in the Probate Court. The final account of the executor was settled without opposition, the estate was fully distributed, and the executor finally discharged. Subsequently the contestants sued the executor for property alleged to have been wrongfully omitted from the inventory: held, that the final settlement under the stipulation was an estoppel.—[Reporter.]
By the Court : The action is brought by Julia and Eliza Grady, heirs at law of one Eliza Berry, deceased, against David Porter, who had been the sole executor of the last will and testament of said deceased, to recover from the latter the sum of eight thousand three hundred and twenty-eight dollars and fifteen one-hundredths, gold coin, and also the value of divers dresses, wearing apparel, jewelry, etc., which it is alleged that he had in his possession, belonging to the estate of the deceased, and which the plaintiffs had demanded of him, but which he had refused to deliver to them.
It appears that one Eliza Berry had departed this life in the year 1870, and thereafter the defendant Porter filed in the Probate Court of San Joaquin County an instrument in writing purporting to be her last will and testament, devising and bequeathing to the said Porter all her property, and nominating him her sole executor. Thereupon the plaintiffs here, the only heirs of said decedent, filed their written opposition to’the probate of the said alleged will, they claiming that it had not been properly executed by the deceased; that she was at the time under restraint, undue influence, and fraudulent misrepresentation, and that the execution of the alleged will was procured through the undue influence and fraudulent misrepresentation of said David Porter. Upon filing these objections, special issues were framed under the direction of the Probate Court, and submitted to a jury duly impanneled. After the evidence had been put in, and before the jury had retired to consider of [683]their verdict, the respective parties, proponent and contestants, entered into and filed in the Probate Court a stipulation, as follows :
“Probate Court,
“In and for the County of San Joaquin, California.
“ In the matter of the estate of Eliza Berry, deceased, December 9th, 1871.
“Proponent of the will, David Porter; contestants of the will, Julia Grady and Eliza J. Grady.
“ It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties to above contest, as follows:
“First—That the Judge shall, by consent of the parties, charge the jury to find the special issues submitted to them in favor of David Porter, the proponent of said will.
“ Second—That there shall, by consent of all parties, be paid out of the assets and estate of said Eliza Berry, deceased, the sum of two thousand five hundred dollars, in United States gold coin, to the counsel for proponent in the above contest.
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)