Rousseau v. Raoul-Duval

Decision Date16 May 1962
Docket NumberRAOUL-DUVAL and T
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
PartiesKathleen M. ROUSSEAU, etc., et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Richardobin & Tobin, law firm acting as Administrators in the matter of Estate of Josephine B. McConnon, Deceased, and Paul O'Gara and O'Gara & O'Gara, attorneys of record representing John McConnon, Joseph McConnon and Kathleen M. Rousseau, etc., et al., Defendants and Respondents. Civ. 19896.

Kathleen M. Rousseau, in pro. per.

Tobin & Tobin, San Francisco, for respondents Richard Raoul-Duval and Tobin & Tobin.

O'Gara & O'Gara, San Francisco, for respondents O'Gara and O'Gara and Paul F. O'Gara.

AGEE, Justice.

Plaintiff, Kathleen M. Rousseau, filed a complaint herein on September 17, 1959, in propria persona. She alleges that she is a daughter of Josephine B. McConnon, deceased, and that she did not receive proper notice of the hearing of the petition for final distribution of her mother's estate; that the hearing was held on September 17, 1956; that by reason of said lack of proper notice, plaintiff was deprived of the opportunity to defend her rights as an heir. The defendants are described as either attorneys for the estate or attorneys employed to represent her in the estate. She alleges that none of them gave her proper notification of the hearing.

The law firm of Tobin and Tobin and Richard Raoul-Duval, of that firm, interposed a general demurrer. So did the law firm of O'Gara and O'Gara and Paul O'Gara, of that firm. These demurrers were sustanined without leave to amend and plaintiff appeals from the judgment which followed.

Under the authority of Flores v. Arroyo, 56 A.C. 491, 15 Cal.Rptr. 87, 364 P.2d 263, we take judicial notice of the decree of final distribution entered in the estate of plaintiff's deceased mother. The decree recites that the mother died on December 31, 1949, leaving a will which was admitted to probate on March 29, 1951; that Virginia Hurtado was appointed and qualified as executrix thereof, that notice of the hearing of the petition for final distribution of the estate had been given in all respects as required by law; that Virginia Hurtado is the sole legatee named in said will; that the final account of the executrix is allowed and approved; that the entire estate is distributed to Virginia Hurtado.

On November 23, 1956, plaintiff filed a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Peltner v. Herterich (In re Estate of Bartsch)
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 8 Junio 2011
  • Estate Of Hans Bartsch v. Herterich
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 22 Marzo 2011
  • Bustamante v. Haet
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 19 Noviembre 1963
    ...notice of this action and the records therein. (Flores v. Arroyo, 56 Cal.2d 492, 15 Cal.Rptr. 87, 364 P.2d 263; Rousseau v. Raoul-Duval, 203 Cal.App.2d 589, 21 Cal.Rptr. 751; Taliaferro v. Taliaferro, 178 Cal.App.2d 140, 141-144, 2 Cal.Rptr. ...
  • In re Estate of Reese, 2d Civil No. B192118 (Cal. App. 1/3/2008)
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 3 Enero 2008
    ...will and not interested as such in his estate. She is not entitled to maintain this appeal individually"]; and see Rousseau v. Raoul-Duval (1962) 203 Cal.App.2d 589, 590-591 In a declaration filed with the probate court, Becker states: "Kimberly Becker has made no claim to be a beneficiary ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT