Legal Opinion

Washington Mutual Bank v. Jacoby

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 24, 2009No. B212347PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BIGELOW, J.

Scott Jacoby appeals from an entry of summary judgment against him. In an interpleader action initiated by Washington Mutual Bank (Washington Mutual), defendants Jacoby and State Farm General Insurance Company (State Farm) both claim an entitlement to excess funds Washington Mutual received in satisfaction of a promissory note secured by a deed of trust it held. Both defendants filed motions for summary judgment. The trial court denied Jacoby’s motion and granted summary judgment to State Farm. We affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The facts are undisputed.…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Alliance Mortgage Co. v. RothwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Cornelison v. KornbluthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Universal Mortgage Co., Inc. v. Prudential Insurance Company, and Does I Through Xx, InclusiveCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
  4. Alexander v. Security-First National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Reynolds v. London & Lancashire Fire Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1900

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. HENSLEY v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY CO.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
  2. Najah v. Scottsdale Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 2014
  3. HENSLEY v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY CO.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API