In re Estate of Pickard (1915) · DecisionDepot

In re Estate of Pickard

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Jan 25, 1915 No. S. F. No. 7068Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed an order setting apart a homestead to a decedent's widow, finding the property suitable for a homestead and sufficiently supported by evidence to be classified as community property.

Issues

Whether the property was suitable for a homestead.
Whether the evidence supported the finding that the property was community property.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The decision of the lower court is sustained on that point on the authority of those cases.”

“Taking the evidence as a whole, there is enough to sustain the finding of the lower court that it was community property.”

“That being the case, the court was justified in setting it apart in fee as a homestead.”

Synopsis

Probate Homestead—Apartment House Constituting Place op Residence mat be Set Aside.—Property belonging to the estate of a decedent, consisting of a lot with a single house thereon containing twelve residence apartments, one of which was occupied by him and his wife as their residence up to the time of his death, and in which she thereafter continued to reside, the other apartments, both prior to and after his death, being leased to various tenants, is of such character and suitability as to entitle it to be set apart as a probate homestead.

Id.—Community Property—Presumption—Setting Aside to 'Widow in Fee.—If the property set apart is community property, and it is presumed to be if acquired after marriage, the court may set it apart to the widow as a homestead, there being no surviving children.

[163]At the close of the argument Shaw, J., delivered the opinion of the court, Sloss, J., and Lawlor, J., concurring:

This is an appeal from an order setting apart a homestead to the widow of the decedent.

So far as the character of the property and its suitability for a homestead are concerned, the case cannot be distinguished from the cases of Heathman v. Holmes, 94 Cal. 291, [29 Pac. 404], Estate of Levy, 141 Cal. 646, [75 Pac. 317], and McKay v. Gesford, 163 Cal. 243, [Ann. Cas. 1913E, 1253, 41 L. R. A. (N. S.) 303, 124 Pac. 1016]. The decision of the lower court is sustained on that point on the authority of those cases.

In regard to the proposition that it is community property, that, of course, is a matter of evidence, the presumption being, to start with, that it was community property. Taking the evidence as a whole, there is enough to sustain the finding of the lower court that it was community property. That being the case, the court was justified in setting it apart in fee as a homestead.

The order is affirmed.

In re Estate of Pickard

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief