Dreyfuss

Dreyfuss v. Union Bank of California

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 29·2000 Cal. LEXIS 8279·2000 Daily Journal DAR 11875·24 Cal. 400·24 Cal. 4th 400
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 6, 2000S082261California5,541 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mosk, J.

In this case, borrowers defaulted on a loan secured by separate deeds of trust on three parcels of real property. The creditor bank conducted a nonjudicial foreclosure of one property and then proceeded with serial foreclosure sales of the remaining properties; prior to each successive sale, it did not seek a judicial determination of fair market value of the property sold or purport to credit such amount to the debt.

We granted review to determine whether the bank thereby violated the antideficiency provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 580a or 580d. There was no violation. Code of Civil Procedure section 580a does not limit a creditor’s right to proceed against multiple items of collateral. Nor did the sales fall under Code of Civil Procedure section 580d’s restriction against deficiency judgments. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

I

The loan at issue herein originated in June 1988, when four entities, LCF Income Group, La Canada Flintridge Development Corporation, San Martin Investment Development Corporation, and Peppertree Corporate Business Park, Ltd. (hereafter collectively the borrowers), borrowed $8.7 million from the Bank 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.