Chesney

Chesney v. Gresham

Good Law
134 Cal. Rptr. 238·1976 Cal. App. LEXIS 2054·64 Cal. App. 3d 120
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 23, 1976Civ. 2903California3,440 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brown, J.

Plaintiff and appellant, Robert L. Chesney, filed this action against the State of California, the County of Merced, Lynn Gresham, as Tax Collector of the County of Merced, David R. Hudgins as Assessor of the County of Merced, and John Hovannisian to set aside a tax sale and deed to the State of California and a subsequent sale and deed of the property to Hovannisian, and in the alternative for damages. The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c) of the defendants State Controller, State of California, County of Merced, Lynn Gresham as Tax Collector of the County of Merced, and David R. Hudgins as Assessor of the County of Merced. Chesney has appealed from the summary judgment.

There is little conflict in the facts. However, since this is an appeal from a summary judgment, where such conflict appears in the papers submitted in support of and in opposition to the motion, we resolve those conflicts in favor of the nonmoving party (appellant herein).

Appellant purchased and obtained title to Lot 170 of the Delhi State Land Development subdivision in Merced County in February 1966, that lot being the subject of this action. He has also…

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.