Legal Opinion

Patterson v. Missler

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 16, 1965No. Civ. 7467PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoughlin, J.

Plaintiffs, as creditors of Wright Refrigeration, Inc., hereinafter referred to as Wright, brought this action against the latter to recover on claims totalling $14,423.79, and against both Wright and defendant Missler to set aside a conveyance of real property by Wright to Missler allegedly fraudulent under the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act. (Civ. Code, §§ 3439.01-3439.12.) The fraudulent conveyance cause of action, as stated in the original complaint, was premised upon the allegation that the conveyance was made by Wright while insolvent without a “fair consideration.” After trial,…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Brewer v. SimpsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Union Sugar Co. v. Hollister Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Stockton Theatres, Inc. v. PalermoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Hansen v. CramerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Pierce v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1974
  2. Pajaro Dunes Rental Agency, Inc. v. Spitters (In Re Pajaro Dunes Rental Agency, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California · 1994
  3. Stearns v. Los Angeles City School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  4. In Re Joseph B. Prejean, Debtor. Ursula Maddox v. Jerome E. RobertsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
  5. Bay Plastics, Inc. v. BT Commercial Corp. (In Re Bay Plastics, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · 1995

9 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