Legal Opinion

Construction Protective Services, Inc. v. Tig Specialty Insurance

California Supreme Court

Decided November 14, 2002No. S099647PublishedCited by 47 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BROWN, J.

Code of Civil Procedure1 section 431.70 provides in pertinent part: “Where cross-demands for money have existed between persons at any point in time when neither demand was barred by the statute of limitations, and an action is thereafter commenced by one such person, the other person may assert in the answer the defense of payment in that the two demands are compensated so far as they equal each other, notwithstanding that an independent action asserting the person’s claim would at the time of filing the answer be barred by the statute of limitations. If the cross-demand…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Foster-Gardner, Inc. v. National Union Fire InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Haggis v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Jones v. MortimerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  4. In Re Estate of BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Sunrise Produce Co. v. MalovichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950

3Cited by47 opinions

  1. City of Stockton v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  2. People v. HugginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Fontenot v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.California Court of Appeal · 2011
  4. Miles v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 2015
  5. Feitelberg v. Credit Suisse First Boston, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005

42 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