Rusheen

Rusheen v. Cohen

Bad Law
37 Cal. 4th 1048·39 Cal. Rptr. 3d 516·128 P.3d 713
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 23, 2006S123203California6,637 words

Opinion

Opinion

Law Office of Robert F. Henry and Robert F. Henry, Culver City, for Cross-complainant and Appellant.

Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, John R. Feliton, Jr., Elizabeth G. O'Donnell and Raul L. Martinez, Los Angeles, for Cross-defendants and Respondents.

Murphy, Pearson, Bradley & Feeney and Mark E. Ellis, Sacramento, for California Association of Collectors, National Association of Retail Collection Attorneys and California Creditors Bar Association as Amici Curiae on behalf of Cross-defendants and Respondents.

CHIN, J.

Are actions taken to collect a judgment, such as obtaining a writ of execution and levying on a judgment debtor's property, protected by the litigation privilege of Civil Code section 47, subdivision (b), as "communication[s]" in the course of a judicial proceeding? In Brown v. Kennard (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 40 , 113 Cal.Rptr.2d 891 ( Brown ), the Court of Appeal held that the privilege protects both the process of applying for the writ of execution and the levy on the judgment debtor's property, as an act of carrying out the writ. On the other hand, in Drum v. Bleau, Fox & Associates (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 1009 , 132 Cal.Rptr.2d 602 ( Drum ), the Court of Appeal…

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.