In re Estate of Murphy
In the Matter of the Estate of LAWRENCE MURPHY
- Area
- probate
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
THE COURT.
This is a motion to dismiss an appeal taken by certain interested parties from the order of court vacating the decree of final distribution theretofore granted in the matter of the estate of Lawrence Murphy, deceased, upon the ground that the order of vacation is not an appealable order.
That such an order is not an appealable order was decided by this court in Estate of Calahan, 60 Cal. 232. That decision has remained unquestioned and unchallenged for eighteen years. It has been consistently upheld by this court whenever the question has arisen. (Estate of Dean, 62 Cal. 613; Lutz v. Christy, 67 Cal. 457; Estate of Cahalan, 70 Cal. 604; In re Wiard, 83 Cal. 619; In re Bauquier, 88 Cal. 302-13; In re Walkerly, 94 Cal. 352; In re Smith, 98 Cal. 636; Iversen v. Superior Court, 115 Cal. 28; Estate of Wittmeier, 118 Cal. 255; Estate of Hickey, 121 Cal. 378.) We are satisfied with the reasoning of these cases and the conclusions there expressed.
The appeal is therefore dismissed.
Cites, in this corpus
- In re the Estate of Wittmeier S. F. No. 893 · 1897-09-13
- Iversen v. Superior Court S. F. No. 407 · 1896-11-12
- In re the Estate of Smith 15198 · 1893-07-11
- In re Estate of Walkerly No. 14834 · 1892-04-26
- In re Bauquier No. 14080 · 1891-03-18
- In re the Estate of Wiard No. 13093 · 1890-04-30
- In re the Estate of Cahalan No. 9065 · 1886-09-03
- Lutz v. Christy No. 9904 · 1885-09-24
- In re the Estate of Dean No. 8,176 · 1882-04-20
- Estate of Calahan No. 7,431 · 1882-03-15