Case Name: In re SCOTT'S ESTATE
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1904-06-06
Citations: 7 Cal. Unrep. 187
Docket Number: S. F. No. 3894
Parties: In re SCOTT’S ESTATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Unreported Cases
Volume: 7
Pages: 187–188

Head Matter:
In re SCOTT’S ESTATE.
S. F. No. 3894;
June 6, 1904.
77 Pac. 446.
Executors—Settlement of Account—Appeal.—It is only necessary for an executor to serve notice of appeal from an order settling Ms account on the persons who appeared and contested the account.
APPEAL from Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco; J. V. Coffey, Judge.
Proceedings for the settlement of the account of the executors of the estate of Angelia R. Scott, deceased. From the order entered after hearing objections of legatees under will of deceased), the executors appeal. On motion to dismiss appeal.
Motion denied.
A. E. Bolton (Philip G. Galpin of counsel) for appellants; Houghton & Houghton, L. Seidenberg and R. P. Clement for respondents.

Opinion:
SHAW, J.
Motion to dismiss the appeal. Upon the hearing of the account of the executors of the estate of Angelia R. Scott, deceased, certain legatees under the will appeared and filed objections to the account, and, upon the contest ensuing thereon, items for which the executors had claimed credit, amounting to over $7,000, were rejected, and an order whs made settling the account accordingly. From this order the executors appealed. Notice of appeal was served on all the legatees who had appeared at the hearing, and attempt was made also to serve the same upon all the parties interested in the estate, including a number of other legatees who did not appear at the hearing, or otherwise make themselves parties to the proceeding. As to some of these parties, the notice was defective, and, for the failure to properly serve these parties, the respondents who filed the objections move to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that it is necessary to serve the notice of appeal upon all the parties interested in the estate, whether they made themselves parties to this proceeding or not. The question involved in this case is substantially the same as that involved in the Estate of McDougald (this day decided by the court in bank), 143 Cal. 476, 77 Pac. 443. Upon the authority of that case, it must be held that the only parties upon whom it is necessary to serve notice of appeal in proceedings of this sort are those who make themselves parties in the court below by appearing at the time of the settlement and contesting the account.
The motion is, denied.
We concur: Angellotti, J.; Van Dyke, J.