Ponsoldt

Texaco, Inc. v. Ponsoldt

Good Law
118 F.3d 1367·97 Daily Journal DAR 8728·1997 WL 371016·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 16778·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5397
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 8, 1997No. 94-55542California2,242 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fernandez, J.

William R. Ponsoldt and Texaco, Inc. were adversaries in two cases in the district court. Texaco and Ponsoldt reached a settlement in those cases; Texaco agreed to pay $500,000 to Ponsoldt. However, just before the scheduled settlement hearing, Jerry Vanier, a creditor of Ponsoldt, gave Texaco notices of garnishment of the settlement proceeds. Texaco also received other notices of claims against the settlement proceeds. On the district court’s advice and before the underlying cases were dismissed, Texaco filed an inter-pleader action and deposited $500,000 with the district court. After the interpleader action was filed, both Vanier and another creditor, Imar Arabians (IA), filed hens against the settlement fund. Vanier filed first, in the underlying district court actions. Shortly thereafter, the court approved the settlement in the underlying cases and dismissed them. Then, many months later, IA filed its hen in the interpleader action. The district court ruled that Vanier’s hen had priority, because it was filed first, even though it was not filed in the interpleader action. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

Apparently, Ponsoldt had several creditors at the time he reached the $500,000…

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.