Butterfield v. Tietz
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
FINLEY, J. pro tem. *
Appellant Belho Corporation was not originally a party to this action. It did not become involved as a party until after judgment in the amount of $12,161.55 was entered in favor of plaintiff-respondent Butter-field and against defendants-respondents as judgment debtors. A writ of execution was issued and certain real property originally belonging to defendants-respondents, but then standing in the name of appellant, was sold to Butterfield at execution sale. Shortly thereafter Butterfield successfully presented a motion to set the sale aside. Appellant prosecutes this…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Elliott v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Adams v. WoodsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Eggert v. Pacific States Savings & Loan Co.California Supreme Court · 1942
- Braun v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Estate of SloanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- County of Alameda v. CarlesonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Leoke v. County of San BernardinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Guardianship of PankeyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Slaughter v. EdwardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- Estate of BaldwinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.