Legal Opinion
Chen v. Berenjian
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
Decided March 28, 2019No. G055496PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFybel, J.
*814INTRODUCTION
After obtaining money judgments against Shazad Berenjian, Pang Yen Chen sued him and his brother Sharmad Berenjian1 for fraudulent transfer under the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (UVTA), Civil Code section 3439 et seq., formerly known as the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (see Stats. 2015, ch. 44, § 3). Chen alleged Shazad and Sharmad had attempted to thwart Chen's attempts to execute on the judgments by colluding in a sham lawsuit, stipulating to a judgment, and allowing Sharmad to execute on the *815judgment. The trial court sustained a demurrer with leave to amend, but Chen…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Schifando v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Rusheen v. CohenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- McCall v. PacifiCare of California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Mejia v. ReedCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Khoury v. Maly's of California, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1993
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- A.J. Fistes Corp. v. GDL Best Contractors, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- A.J. Fistes Corp. v. GDL Best Contractors, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2019
- Avenmarg v. Humboldt CountyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2020
- Bagby v. DavisIdaho Supreme Court · 2023
- Blue Line Foodservice Distribution, Inc. v. CathcartDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2025
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.