Blonder

Blonder v. CUMBERLAND ENGINEERING

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 454·71 Cal. App. 4th 1057·84 Cal. Rptr. 2d 216·99 Daily Journal DAR 4109·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3204
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 29, 1999E022038California2,554 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richli, J.

Respondent David Blonder, as assignee for the benefit of creditors of Envirothene, Inc., obtained a judgment invalidating security interests held by appellant Cumberland Engineering in certain assets of Envirothene, as preferential transfers under Code of Civil Procedure section 1800. We affirm the judgment, concluding (1) the statute of limitations did not expire on Blender’s preference claim; and (2) Blonder had standing to bring the claim even though he had sold the assets subject to the security interests.

I

Factual and Procedural Background

A. Facts

In February 1995, Cumberland sold a plastics recycling system and auxiliary equipment to Envirothene and at some point received security interests covering the unpaid balances. In June 1995, Cumberland sold Envirothene an additional item known as a granulator and, concurrently with that sale, filed a UCC-1 financing statement to perfect a security interest in that item to cover the unpaid balance. On October 18, 1995, Cumberland filed additional UCC-1 statements to perfect its security interests in the recycling system and auxiliary equipment, which had not been perfected earlier.

On December 7, 1995, Envirothene…

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.