DEERING, Frank Prentiss

From WikiName
Jump to: navigation, search

DEERING, Frank Prentiss (1855-1939), attorney for the trustees of the Santa Cruz Island Company, Albina Caire and her children Arthur, Frederic, Helene and Delphine Caire, against their siblings Amelie Caire Rossi and Aglae Caire Capuccio. Deering appeared before the Supreme Court in San Francisco in 1921 to argue the merits of the 1913 revival of the Santa Cruz Island Company which had forfeited its charter in 1911 as a result of failing to pay a $5 license tax. Deering lost his case when it was ruled the original corporation, the Santa Cruz Island Company, could not be reinstated intact. Company assets at the time of the forfeiture had to be liquidated and divided among the trustees before the company could be reinstated. Settlement negotiations between Deering and Ambrose Gherini failed, and as a result, in 1925 the island was partitioned into seven parcels.

Deering also represented the Santa Cruz Island Company in its sale to Edwin Stanton in 1937. (His bill for doing so was $751.13.) Deering was the first librarian and later president of the San Francisco Law Library. He annotated the penal and civil procedure codes of California, the first work of its kind in the United States, and he also assisted in editing the first thirty volumes of American Decisions. Deering was also a trustee at Stanford University and co-founder of the San Francisco law firm, Myrick, Deering & Scott. Deering died a month before his 84th birthday.


BLUXOME?? Was Caire family attorney, older than Deering. Deering brought suit on.


In the News~

March 13, 1923 [SBMP]: “New attempt to halt island partition. Caire estate appeals lost motion seeking to curb referees. Another step, aimed at to hold up the partition of Santa Cruz Island, was taken yesterday when the Caire interests, chief owners, filed a bill of exception, appealing to the higher court from the ruling of Judge S. E. Crow, which denied a motion to instruct the referees in the matter of expenses and making maps. In the motion made by F. P. Deering of San Francisco, it was claimed that existing maps and plats of the island are sufficient for the purpose of participation. The motion also asked that the court instruct the referees, Frank F. Flournoy, George W. McComber and H. J. Doulton, to take orders from none but the court in making the survey...”