Marsch

Aspen International Capital Corp. v. Marsch

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 1276·235 Cal. App. 3d 1199·286 Cal. Rptr. 921·91 Daily Journal DAR 13655·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8874
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 1, 1991D013434California2,455 words

Opinion

Opinion

Work, J.

—Nicolas Marsch III and Cal-Colorado Investors, a California general partnership (collectively Marsch) appeal an order amending the California judgment entered upon a Colorado judgment pursuant to the California Sister State Money Judgments Act (Act) (Code Civ. Proc., § 1710.10 et seq.) in favor of Aspen International Capital Corporation (Aspen) to include additional costs and attorney’s fees incurred in the collection of the judgment. Marsch contends the superior court was without jurisdiction to amend the judgment and alternatively, even if it did have jurisdiction, there exists no statutory authority allowing the court to award attorney’s fees incurred in enforcing a California judgment. Finally, Marsch asserts that regardless of whether the court had postjudgment jurisdiction and authority, that power ceased upon his satisfaction of the entered judgment, rendering Aspen’s request untimely. As we shall explain, we conclude Marsch’s assertions are meritless and affirm the order with directions the trial court further amend the judgment to include reasonable attorney’s fees incurred on appeal.

Factual and Procedural Background

On May 18,1989, Aspen obtained the entry…

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.