The record-union., 1895-12-11
THE OPPBNHEIM ESTATE TROUBLE.
Effort to Set Aside the Decree Of
Distribution.
Philip Oppenheim and His Sister
Make Answer to the Latest Com
plant of Their Brother.

The case of Louisa A. Oppenheim
against Philip and Emanuel Oppenheim
and Mrs. California Thompson was be-
fore Judge Prewett of Placer in De-
partment Two of the Superior Court
was a motion TO set aside the decree of
distribution made in the matter of the
estate of R. Oppenheim, deceased.
! The defendants were represented in
court by Attorney T. z. Brakeman of
San Francisco, and the plaintiff and
cross Emanuel Open
helm, by Albert M. Johnson, C. T. Jones
and Devlin & Devlin.
! In the hearing of the matters at issue
the dispositions of Dr. w. R. Cluness
and c. w. Clarke have been introduced
in evidence. Various motions were ar
/ gued, and finally the case was contin-
ued till Thursday.
! Defendants Philip Oppenheim and his
sister, Mrs. Thompson, have filed their
answer to the second amended cross
complaint of their brother Emanuel, set
ting forth a general and specific denial
| TO all of the aVermentS made therein.
The answer also sets forth that in Sep
| TENDER, 1891 at the request of Emanuel
/
| his mother (the plaintiff), defendant
Philip Oppenheim lent to his brother
! out of the trust estate the sum of $1,000,
! taking his prOmiSSory note therefor to
run four years with interest at the rate
OF per cent. per annum; that as Sc
curity therefor Emanuel Oppenheim de-
nvered to the defendant, as trustee, a
mortgage on his interest in the real es-
tate as embraced in the deed of trust,
and that on said note only one semi
annual payment of interest was made.
Defendant Philip Oppenheim further
alleges that in accordance with the
written agreement of all the parties to
the action he delivered in January, 1894,
to his brother Emanuel property of the
estate valued at S11,S17 50 as an adj
vance on account of his interest in the
estate. In said written agreement it
was agreed by Emanuel Oppenheim
that there should be charged to his
dlstributiVe share of the estate the
sum above mentioned, 81 ,S17 90. This
sum, in addition to the $1,000 pre-
yiously advanced, interest, etc, makes
the total amount paid to Emanuel OPP
penheim nearly $4,000
Philip Oppenheim further alleges that
in September, 1893, with the written
| agreement and consent of all the par
ties concerned, there was paid out of the
trust estate 81, 500 each to his brother
Emanuel, his sister, Mrs. California
Thompson, and to himself also the sum
of 81 100 for a monument to be erected
on their fathers grave.
| Defendant Philip Oppenheim also al
| leges in his answer that his brother
Emanuel had persuaded their mother
! to give him or pay out for his account
the greater portion of the income of
the trust property of the estate, and
that he (EmanueD had also induced his
mother to go security for his debts
with the intent of procuring more than
his share of the property.
1t is also set forth that defendants
Philip Oppenheim and Mrs. California
Thompson believe that because their
brother Emanuel had received all of
the property to which they would con-
sent he induced their mother to bring
this action. They pray the court to de-
termine what sum Emanuel has re-
ceived from the estate and that it be
charged against him as an advance
ment on account of his portion.