gno.law

Rush v. McDermott

California Supreme Court · No. 4932 · 1875-07-01 · Published · 50 Cal. 471

SARAH E. RUSH, Administratrix of the Estate of HIRAM RUSH v. C. W. McDERMOTT and J. G. JOHNSTON

Area
civil

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

By the Court:

The administratrix has no power to bind the heirs by consenting to a proceeding under the provisions of the Political Code for laying out a public highway, by which they are divested of their estate in lands without their consent. If her acts in this case are to be construed as a consent on her part to the proceeding, they are to that extent void, and are not obligatory either upon her as administratrix or upon the heirs; and aside from the assumed assent of the administratrix, it is not pretended that any other person interested in the estate assented, or that any steps were taken to condemn the land. Under these circumstances, the order for establishing the road and declaring it to be a public highway cannot be supported.

Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded. Remittitur forthwith.