Legal Opinion
Kirby v. Palos Verdes Escrow Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 1, 1986No. A027529PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
LOW, P. J.
Under the California Uniform Commercial Code, a payor of an assigned note is not liable for making payment to the assignor rather than to the assignee if he has not received actual notice of the assignment, However, where an escrow holder acts as the agent of the payor, the escrow holder breaches a fiduciary duty if after receiving notice of an assignment of the right to escrow funds, it distributes escrow funds to the assignor rather than the assignee.
Defendant Palos Verdes Escrow Company, Inc. (Palos Verdes) appeals from the judgment entered in favor of plaintiffs John and…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Spaziani v. MillarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Domarad v. Fisher & Burke, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1969
- MTR. CHASE MANHATTAN v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Staff Mortgage and Investment Corporation v. WikleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
- Contini v. Western Title InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- American State Bank v. AdkinsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
- Summit Financial Holdings, Ltd. v. Continental Lawyers Title Co.California Supreme Court · 2002
- Peterson Development Co. v. Torrey Pines BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- TRIPLE a MANAGEMENT CO. v. FrisoneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Vournas v. Fidelity National Title InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.