Legal Opinion

Holloway v. Quetel

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 14, 2015No. B259622PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PERLUSS, P. J.

Purvis Holloway, an incarcerated and self-represented litigant, appeals from the judgment entered in favor of Talia Quetel and Antonio McDaniels after the trial court found Holloway had not provided required documentation and failed to carry his burden of proof with regard to entry of a default judgment on his complaint for unpaid rent and damages to the rental property. Holloway contends he provided the court with all necessary documents and complied with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 585, subdivisions (b) and (d), and California Rules of Court,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Kim v. Westmoore Partners, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
  2. Pazderka v. Caballeros Dimas Alang, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. Hopkins & Carley v. GensCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  4. Ford v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
  5. Austin v. ValverdeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Alaama v. Presbyterian Intercommunity Hospital, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2019
  2. Patkins v. Piantini CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2020
  3. Rosas v. Kensington Caterers CA2/3California Court of Appeal · 2020
  4. Zadok v. Tarzana Springs CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API