Hadden

Glendale Federal Bank v. Hadden

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 705·73 Cal. App. 4th 1150·87 Cal. Rptr. 2d 102·99 Daily Journal DAR 7791·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6112
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 29, 1999G020633California2,725 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rylaarsdam, J.

Plaintiff Glendale Federal Bank (Bank), the beneficiary of a deed of trust in a leasehold interest, apparently failed to obtain an agreement from the property owners permitting it to cure the tenants’ default. When the tenants defaulted, defendants Nancy Hadden and the Nancy Hadden Trust (Landlords), the owners of the property, terminated the leasehold in an unlawful detainer action; they did not join Bank in the action. Thereafter, Bank sued for declaratory relief, seeking to establish that it maintained an “interest” in the now extinguished leasehold. Landlords successfully moved for summary judgment. Bank appeals, claiming that the trial court erred by finding: (1) it was not an indispensable party in the unlawful detainer action; (2) the municipal court had jurisdiction over the matter; and (3) its interest in the leasehold had been forfeited as a result of the unlawful detainer action. We reject Bank’s contentions and affirm. '

Facts

Landlords leased two triplex dwellings to Kenneth and Eleanor Koll. The lease was subsequently assigned to Phillip Richardson and Julie Richardson (Tenants). Bank loaned Tenants $332,500, and they in turn executed a promissory note 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.