Legal Opinion
Yao v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 13, 2002No. B157220PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
VOGEL (C. S.), P. J.
Introduction
“Code of Civil Procedure section 1030 provides that upon a defendant’s motion, the trial court is required to order an out-of-state plaintiff to file an undertaking to secure recoverable costs and attorney’s fees if the defendant shows a reasonable possibility that it will obtain judgment in the action.” (Baltayan v. Estate of Getemyan (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 1427, 1430 [110 Cal.Rptr.2d 72].) If the undertaking is not posted, the action “shall be dismissed as to the defendant in whose favor the order requiring the undertaking was made.” (§ 1030, subd. (d).)…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Beaudreau v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Efron v. KalmanovitzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Skaff v. Small Claims CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Ziller Electronics Lab GmbH v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Baltayan v. Estate of GetemyanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. Christina N.California Court of Appeal · 2005
- Zalkind v. Ceradyne, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Alshafie v. LallandeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- People v. ChildsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Sustainability v. Dep't of Res. Recycling & Recovery, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.