Imperial Bank v. Pim Electric, Inc.

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 280·33 Cal. App. 4th 540·39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 432·95 Daily Journal DAR 3847·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2265
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 27, 1995A064379California6,394 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kline, J.

Introduction

Judgment debtors John and Barbara Pim and Pim Electric, Inc., appeal from an order of a referee appointed by the Alameda County Superior Court, ordering appellants to turn over to a levying officer 27 specific assets identified by appellants during their judgment debtor examinations to satisfy a debt owed to respondent Imperial Bank (Bank). Appellants’ principal contention is that the referee erred in issuing the turnover order before a determination of whether the assets covered by the order were exempt or subject to third party claims. Appellants also contend the turnover order denied them procedural due process safeguards under section 699.040, that the order was an improper remedy given the character of the assets at issue, and that they were prejudiced by the order. In their reply brief, appellants contend the referee lacked authority under the appointing order to conduct examination proceedings and to issue turnover orders in furtherance thereof.

Statement of the Case

On December 16, 1992, judgment was entered against appellants and in favor of respondent Bank in the amount of $543,000 plus interest, attorney fees and costs. Following the entry of…

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.