Jack Farenbaugh & Son v. Belmont Construction, Inc.

Good Law
194 Cal. App. 3d 1023·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 2118·240 Cal. Rptr. 78
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 15, 1987B022184California3,399 words

Opinion

Opinion

Roberson, J.

Appellant Neal B. West appeals from an order of the trial court granting plaintiff/respondent’s motion to amend a judgment obtained by respondent against a corporate defendant (Belmont Construction, Inc.) to include appellant who was not named in the original complaint nor in the original judgment as a judgment debtor based on an alter ego theory.

Appellant’s principal contention is that he was deprived of his due process rights and that the trial court abused its discretion in that: (1) there was no evidence that appellant controlled the litigation on behalf of the corporate defendant in the case in which the judgment was given and (2) there was no showing that appellant was the alter ego of the corporate defendant. Appellant further contends that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to disqualify itself from hearing the motion to amend the judgment.

I

Facts

In March 1978, plaintiff/respondent Jack Farenbaugh & Son entered into a written contract with Belmont Construction, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Belmont), a California corporation, for grading on a parcel of property on which Belmont was building. A dispute arose between respondent and Belmont…

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.