Legal Opinion

Ostly v. Saper

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 18, 1957No. Civ. 21796PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAshburn, J.

Certain money which was paid into superior court in an interpleader proceeding was deposited by the clerk in the county treasury. While there it earned substantial interest. The question is whether that interest belongs to the persons ultimately held to be owners of the principal amount or to the county of Los Angeles. The county’s claim having been rejected, its clerk, treasurer and auditor appeal. The deposit was made pursuant to section 573, Code of Civil Procedure, which says: “Whenever money is paid into or deposited in the court, the same must be delivered to the clerk . . . [who] must,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Metropolitan Water District v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Pomona City School District v. PayneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  3. Board of Law Library Trustees v. LoweryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  4. Butler v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Redevelopment Agency v. GoodmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  2. City of King City v. Community Bank of CentralCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  3. Fresno Fire Fighters v. JernaganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  4. Untitled California Attorney General Opinion, California Attorney General Reports1988

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

Powered by the Exa API