Maximum Technology v. Superior Court

Good Law
188 Cal. App. 3d 935·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1291·233 Cal. Rptr. 733
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 16, 1987A036565California1,013 words

Opinion

Opinion

Merrill, J.

Petitioner Maximum Technology, plaintiff in an action seeking damages arising out of a failed commercial transaction, challenges a ruling striking its at-issue memorandum and removing the case from the civil active list. The court’s action was taken because one of several defen dants was under the jurisdiction of a federal bankruptcy court. We conclude that the court erred in striking the at-issue memorandum on that ground.

Petitioner purchased highly reflective silver film manufactured by Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (3M) and distributed by Litrex Corporation. According to petitioner, the film was defective. Unused film was returned to 3M, who accepted the return and sent a refund to petitioner through Litrex. According to petitioner, Litrex “converted” the refund check.

Petitioner has sued 3M, Litrex, and Robert A. D. Schwartz (as alter ego of Litrex). Before petitioner was able to levy an attachment on Litrex’s assets, Litrex filed for chapter II reorganization (Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq.). The other defendants answered the complaint (3M and Schwartz each cross-complained against other parties) and petitioner filed an at-issue memorandum.…

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.