Legal Opinion

Arc Investment Co. v. Tiffith

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 1, 1958No. Civ. A. 9567PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDavid, J.

Plaintiff holds a default judgment against defendant upon a promissory note for indebtedness, not incurred for a necessary of life. Defendant’s wages in the hands of his employer were garnished on three successive occasions, and since judgment, one execution levy was made upon them. In each instance, defendant claimed full exemption under Code of Civil Procedure, section 690.11, by verified affidavits, and a corporate officer of the plaintiff corporation filed a counter affidavit, in a stock form, asserting “that affiant is informed and believes and therefore alleges that the moneys claimed…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Brydonjack v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Millholen v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Kirstowsky v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  4. Tranchina v. ArcinasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  5. Lincoln v. DidakCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Rusheen v. CohenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  2. White Lighting Co. v. WolfsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
  4. Bloniarz v. RolosonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Chrysler Corp. v. Fedders Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1982

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

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

Powered by the Exa API