Legal Opinion

Jans v. Nelson

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 14, 2000No. F030416PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

VARTABEDIAN, Acting P. J.

In this rather complex case, we conclude the trial court, operating in a murky area of law, applied an erroneous standard of law in determining the amount of contribution that must be paid by coguarantors of a business debt. (Jessup Farms v. Baldwin (1983) 33 Cal.3d 639, 650, fn. 7 [190 Cal.Rptr. 355, 660 P.2d 813].) Because the relevant facts are undisputed, we apply the correct principles of equity to those facts and direct the trial court to enter a modified judgment.

Introductory Summary

As we will discuss in some detail below, the law of equitable…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Jessup Farms v. BaldwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Niederer v. FerreiraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
  3. Blankenhorn-Hunter-Dulin Co. v. ThayerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Curtis v. CichonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  5. Tucker v. NicholsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Portico Management Group, LLC v. HarrisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  2. In Re Estate of EgelandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Focus 15, LLC v. NICO CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API