Legal Opinion

Canal-Randolph Anaheim, Inc. v. JE WILKOSKI

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 12, 1980No. Civ. 20793PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

TAMURA, Acting P. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment denying a claim of exemption and adjudicating several third party claims to office equipment, furnishings and law books of J. E. Wilkoski, a law corporation, which were subject to a levy under a writ of execution on a judgment against the law corporation. The principal issue, which appears to be one of first impression, is whether a law corporation is entitled to the benefit of the exemption provided by Code of Civil Procedure section 690.4.

The record on appeal consists only of the judgment roll and a limited engrossed settled…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Moyer v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Nestle v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Stevens v. Parke, Davis & Co.California Supreme Court · 1973
  4. In Re Marriage of MixCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Panopulos v. MaderisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Crouse v. Brobeck, Phleger & HarrisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  2. Star Pacific Investments, Inc. v. Oro Hills Ranch, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1981
  3. Meyer v. Byron Jackson, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1984
  4. International Canning Machinery, Ltd. v. Murrieta Hot Springs (In re Murrieta Hot Springs)United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · 1980
  5. California Coastal Commission v. AllenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API