Essex
Essex v. Diaz CA4/3
Opinion
Opinion
FACTS
Plaintiffs obtained a judgment against Diaz in excess of $2,300,000, including $500,000 in punitive damages, on December 16, 2010. The court found Diaz engaged in false and deceptive advertising in connection with her sale of memberships to a diet Web site. Resolution of the issues presented herein do not require us to detail the actions of Diaz that gave rise to the judgment. On July 10, 2012, subsequent to the sheriff levying on Diaz’s interest in the her dwelling, plaintiffs filed a notice of hearing on their application for an order of sale for Diaz’s personal dwelling pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure1 sections 704.740— 704.760. The application alleged Diaz’s property may qualify for a $75,000 homestead exemption. Plaintiffs alleged Diaz’s dwelling had a $295,000 fair market value. The $295,000 fair market value was based on an exterior-only inspection residential appraisal report that included comparable sales. The appraiser expressly stated he was unaware of
1All undesignated statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure unless otherwise stated.
2 any needed repairs and assumed there were none that would make the property less valuable. Plaintiffs later…