Carville

Blue Mountain Development Co. v. Carville

Bad Law
132 Cal. App. 3d 1005·183 Cal. Rptr. 594·1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 1685
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 22, 1982Civ. 25821California2,662 words

Opinion

Opinion

Trotter, J.

The application of Blue Mountain Development Company (Blue Mountain), a judgment creditor, for a writ of execution on a dwelling (Code Civ. Proc., § 690.31, subd. (c)) was denied by the court below. Blue Mountain filed a motion for reconsideration (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008), and this motion was also denied. Blue Mountain has attempted to appeal from both rulings but we conclude, for the reasons stated below, that the appeal from the denial of the original application is untimely. We also conclude that the motion for reconsideration was properly denied because the application was not “based upon an alleged different state of facts.”

Facts

Blue Mountain obtained by assignment judgments against Larry Duff for $1,569.11 and $4,274.78. Abstracts of the two judgments were recorded in San Bernardino County in May 1979. In April 1979, one month earlier, Larry and Jean Duff, as husband and wife, had recorded a declaration of homestead on certain real property in Big Bear City. In July 1979, Larry and Jean Duff sold this property to Chester and Suzanne Carville.

Over a year later, in December 1980, Blue Mountain applied for a writ of execution. In the application, Blue Mountain…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.