Haberbush

Haberbush v. CHARLES CUMMINS FAMILY LP

Good Law
139 Cal. App. 4th 1630·43 Cal. Rptr. 3d 814
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 2006B175947California2,709 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moneymaker & Moneymaker and Richard M. Moneymaker, Los Angeles, for all Defendants and Appellants.

SulmeyerKupetz, Alan G. Tippie and Marcus A. Tompkins, Los Angeles, for Plaintiff and Appellant and for Plaintiff and Respondent.

CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION. [*]

BOLAND, J.

These consolidated appeals involve an assignment for the benefit of creditors. The assignee brought three lawsuits, under Code of Civil Procedure section 1800, to avoid and recover preferential transfers. In the published portion of this opinion, we disagree with the majority opinion in Sherwood Partners, Inc. v. Lycos, Inc. (9th Cir.2005) 394 F.3d 1198 ( Sherwood Partners ), and conclude that Code of Civil Procedure section 1800 is not preempted by the federal Bankruptcy Code.

On August 1, 2001, Carolyn's Country Pies, Inc. (Carolyn's) executed a voluntary general assignment for the benefit of creditors. (Code Civ. Proc., § 493.010.) Plaintiff David R. Haberbush (Haberbush) was the assignee. In his capacity as assignee for the benefit of Carolyn's creditors, Haberbush brought three lawsuits, under Code of Civil Procedure section 1800, to avoid and recover certain payments as preferential transfers.…

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.