Gee

Gee v. American Realty & Construction Inc.

Bad Law
122 Cal. Rptr. 2d 167·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4382·2002 Daily Journal DAR 7771·99 Cal. App. 4th 1412·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6230
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 3, 2002No. A095457California1,713 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Kay, J.

On May 21, 2002, this court filed the following opinion:

“On July 9, 2001, this court affirmed a summary judgment and an order for costs and contractual attorney fees of $99,496.13 awarded to defendants, who were sued for fraud and breach of contract by plaintiffs, the buyers of parcels in a planned subdivision. (Gee v. American Realty & Construction, Inc. (July 9, 2001, A090121) [nonpub. opn.].) During the pendency of that appeal, defendants recorded abstracts of the judgment on plaintiffs’ parcels and noticed a ‘Motion for Order Allowing Judgment Creditor to File Abstract of Judgment with Recorders’ Office.’ The trial court denied the motion and ordered that the abstracts ‘shall be released.’ Defendants filed a timely notice of appeal.

“The judgment and order awarding defendants costs and contractual attorney fees would be automatically stayed on appeal without the necessity of an undertaking. (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 916, subd. (a), 917.1, subd. (d), 917.9, *1414 subd. (a)(3); Bank of San Pedro v. Superior Court (1992) 3 Cal.4th 797, 800-801 [ 12 Cal.Rptr.2d 696 , 838 P.2d 218 ].) The major point argued by defendants in their briefs is that Code of Civil Procedure…

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.