Casey

Casey v. Gray

Good Law
13 Cal. App. 4th 611·16 Cal. Rptr. 2d 538·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 108·93 Daily Journal DAR 2894·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 921
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 3, 1993B061720California694 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

The question on this appeal is whether a recorded abstract of judgment attaches to property previously conveyed by an unrecorded quitclaim deed. It does not.

Facts

In March 1979, a money judgment later assigned to Dudley Gray was entered against Scott Berglund. In September 1979, Berglund and his partner, Daniel Casey, purchased real property in San Pedro. On February 1, 1982, Berglund executed a quitclaim deed transferring his interest in the San Pedro property to Casey. On February 17, 1982, an abstract of the 1979 judgment against Berglund was recorded. On May 5, 1982, Berglund’s quitclaim deed to Casey was recorded. In December 1987, Casey sold the San Pedro property and, to clear title, paid $44,177.32 to Gray for a release of the abstract of judgment.

Casey then filed this action to recover his $44,177.32 from Gray or Berglund, claiming (among other things) that the judgment lien did not attach to the San Pedro property because the judgment debtor (Berglund) had conveyed the property to Casey before the abstract was recorded. Following a court trial, judgment was rendered in favor of Gray and Berglund. Casey appeals.

Discussion

Casey contends an executed and…

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.