Legal Opinion
MacEdo v. Bosio
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 10, 2001No. A090484PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HAERLE, J.
I. Introduction
This is an action, originally filed in Humboldt County and then transferred to San Francisco, to set aside certain Stanislaus County real property conveyances as fraudulent. The superior court sustained a demurrer to appellant’s amended complaint without leave to amend. The basis of its ruling was that the suit was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. We reverse.
II. Factual and Procedural Background
In September 1986, both appellant Loretta Macedo (hereafter appellant) and respondent Richard J. Bosio (hereafter Bosio) were named as defendants in a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Brown v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Cortez v. VogtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- Monastra v. Konica Business MacHines, U.S.A., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1996
- Levy v. Markal Sales Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2000
- Adams v. BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Archdale v. American International Specialty Lines InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Fleet National Bank v. Valente (In Re Valente)Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2004
- Pga W. Residential Ass'n, Inc. v. Hulven Int'l, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Fidelity National Title Insurance v. SchroederCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Jhaveri v. TeitelbaumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.