California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 946 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If there is no law to the contrary, in the place where personal property is situated, it is deemed to follow the person of its owner, and is governed by the law of his domicile.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1945–2023 · leading case: Cairns v. Franklin Mint Co., 292 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Cairns v. Franklin Mint Co., 292 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. 2002). · cites it 7× “On October 16, 1998, the District Court granted Franklin Mint’s motion to dismiss the Fund’s post-mortem right of publicity claim under California Civil Code § 990. Cairns v. Franklin Mint Co.”

Cairns v. Franklin Mint Co., 24 F. Supp. 2d 1013 (C.D. Cal. 1998). · cites it 3× “” Cal. Civ.Code § 946. Defendants contend § 946 governs our inquiry and mandates application of British law; plaintiffs argue the choice of law question must be resolved under California’s standard governmental interest analysis.”

David Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection, 69 F.4th 554 (9th Cir. 2023). · cites it 4× “Although California has codified a choice-of-law provision relating to personal property, see Cal. Civ. Code § 946 , this likewise sheds no light on the dispute before us.”

Acme Circus Operating Co., Inc., a Florida Corp. v. Jane Beatty Kuperstock, 711 F.2d 1538 (11th Cir. 1983). · cites it 2× “1 In step two we must ascertain what choice of law principle California courts apply to issues of personal property law.”

Milton H. Greene Archives, Inc. v. CMG Worldwide, Inc., 568 F. Supp. 2d 1152 (C.D. Cal. 2008). “436 (1961) (recognizing that, under California Civil Code § 946, a decedent’s personal property should be distributed according to the law of his or her domicile); see Shaw Family Archives, Ltd.”

Est. of Lund, 159 P.2d 643 (Cal. 1945). “806 ]) and in the case of movables by the law of the domicile of the father at the time of his death unless the law of the situs of the property provides that the law of the decedent’s domicile shall not govern (Civ. Code, § 946; Estate of Apple (1885), 66 Cal.”

Cairns v. Franklin Mint Co., 120 F. Supp. 2d 880 (C.D. Cal. 2000). “In dismissing this claim, the Court held that because then Civil Code § 990 did not contain a choice-of-law provision, Civil Code § 946 required application of British law.”

Lightbourne v. Printroom Inc., 307 F.R.D. 593 (C.D. Cal. 2015). “Cal. Civ.Code § 946 (“If there is no law to the contrary, in the place where personal property is situated, it is deemed to follow the person of its owner, and is governed by the law of his domicile.”

Hebrew Univ. of Jerusalem v. Gen. Motors LLC, 878 F. Supp. 2d 1021 (C.D. Cal. 2012). “Cal. Civ.Code § 946 (“If there is no law to the contrary, in the place where personal property is situated, it is deemed to follow the person of its owner, and is governed by the law of his domicile.”

Rams v. Def Jam Recordings, Inc., 202 F. Supp. 3d 376 (2016). · cites it 2× “According to Defendants, 4 the right of publicity is a personal property right, and California Civil Code § 946 provides that “personal property rights are governed by the law of the property owner’s domicile.”

Hebrew Univ. v. Gen. Motors LLC, 903 F. Supp. 2d 932 (C.D. Cal. 2012). “See Cal. Civ.Code § 946 (“If there is no law to the contrary, in the place where personal property is situated, it is deemed to follow the person of its owner, and is governed by the law of his domicile.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.