Fong

Fong v. Westly

Good Law
117 Cal. App. 4th 841·12 Cal. Rptr. 3d 76·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 496·2004 Daily Journal DAR 4503·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3202
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 11, 2004C042007California4,571 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nicholson, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment against their claims for monetary and equitable relief arising from the custodial escheat of stock shares they owned. We affirm.

STATUTORY BACKGROUND

Under the Unclaimed Property Law, certain types of unclaimed property escheats to the state. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1500 et seq.; all undesignated references to sections are to the Code of Civil Procedure.) The law has two objectives: (1) protect unknown property owners by locating them and restoring their property to them, and (2) give the state, rather than the owners of the unclaimed property, the benefits of holding the property, since experience shows most abandoned property will never be claimed. (Bank of America v. Cory (1985) 164 Cal.App.3d 66, 74 [ 210 Cal.Rptr. 351 ].)

The statute does not operate a true escheat. The law expressly provides title to property received by the state under its provisions does not pass to the state. (§ 1501.5.) The state holds the property as a custodian until the property’s rightful owner can claim the property.

In general, the law declares certain personal property either located in the state or owned by a California resident escheats to the state…

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.