Jans v. Nelson
California Court of Appeal
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
- Jessup Farms v. BaldwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
- Niederer v. FerreiraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
- Blankenhorn-Hunter-Dulin Co. v. ThayerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Curtis v. CichonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
- Tucker v. NicholsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Portico Management Group, LLC v. HarrisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- In Re Estate of EgelandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2007
- Focus 15, LLC v. NICO CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2022