Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► [ Ссылка ]
Bank of California Nat. Ass’n v. Superior Court of San Francisco | 16 Cal.2d 516, 106 P.2d 879 (1940)
Generally, necessary parties are persons who are interested in the subject matter of a lawsuit and should be made parties to the action. By contrast, indispensable parties are persons who must be included as parties in an action in order for a court to give complete relief. But what happens if a necessary party isn’t joined in the action? May a court proceed without it? That was the question for the California Supreme Court in Bank of California National Association versus Superior Court of San Francisco.
In June of nineteen thirty-seven, Sara Boyd died testate, or with a will. At the time of her death, her estate was worth about two hundred twenty-five thousand dollars. Under her will, Boyd left many gifts amounting to sixty thousand dollars to charitable institutions and other individuals. Further, Boyd left her residual estate, which was most of her estate, to Saint Luke’s Hospital.
Boyd’s will was admitted to probate, and the Bank of California was appointed executor.
A few months later, Bertha Smedley, Boyd’s niece and a beneficiary of her will, brought an action in the Superior Court of San Francisco to enforce an alleged contract where Boyd agreed to leave Smedley her entire estate. In the action, Smedley named the bank and other beneficiaries as defendants. However, the summons was served only on the bank and Saint Luke’s. Consequently, no defendants other than the bank and Saint Luke’s appeared in the action.
In response, the bank and Saint Luke’s moved for a writ to have the other beneficiaries brought in and served with a summons, arguing that they were necessary and indispensable parties. The superior court denied the motion. The bank and Saint Luke’s then filed a writ of prohibition with the California Supreme Court to suspend the trial until the other defendants were brought in.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: [ Ссылка ]
The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► [ Ссылка ]
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: [ Ссылка ]
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► [ Ссылка ]
Quimbee Case Brief App ► [ Ссылка ]
Facebook ► [ Ссылка ]
Twitter ► [ Ссылка ]
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
