Haines

Haines v. Parra

Good Law
193 Cal. App. 3d 1553·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1999·239 Cal. Rptr. 178
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 10, 1987A037046California2,525 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kline, J.

1.

Kay Parra appeals, in propria persona, from a summary judgment entered in favor of respondent, Lloyd M. Haines, in his action against her for conversion. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

On November 9, 1982, Haines filed a complaint against Parra for conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, conspiracy to commit conversion and money had and received. Haines alleged that on or about December 14, 1980, Parra maliciously and fraudulently converted $4,000 of his money to her own use and that although he had demanded return of the money, she had failed and refused to return it. Pursuant to Civil Code section 3336, Haines sought to recover the $4,000 plus interest, punitive damages and fair compensation for time and money that he had expended in pursuit of his property.

On August 29, 1985, Haines filed a motion for summary judgment on the ground that the issues presented by his complaint had previously been determined against Parra in a criminal action, People v. Parra (1985) 165 Cal.App.3d 874 [ 212 Cal.Rptr. 53 ], certiorari denied 474 U.S. 1023 [ 88 L.Ed.2d 561 , 106 S.Ct. 578 ], and were conclusive in this civil action by virtue of the doctrine of collateral…

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.