Phenegar v. Paolini
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County and from an order denying a new trial. George E. Church, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
The plaintiff, as a judgment creditor of the defendant, E. Desperati, originally proceeded in this action by way of a creditor’s bill for the purpose of obtaining a decree declaring void and setting aside a transfer by the latter to the defendant, Marchetti, of certain notes and mortgages upon the ground that said transfer had been made with the intent to defraud the plaintiff of his claim against the said defendant, Desperati.
The third amended and supplemental complaint, upon which, with the answers thereto and a cross-complaint, by the defendant, Marchetti, the present action was tried, was…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lange v. WatersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Roberts v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Spencer v. DuncanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Commercial Bank of Santa Ana v. PritchardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
3Cited by6 opinions
- Litvinuk v. LitvinukCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
- Klein Norton Co. v. CohenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Ross v. McDougalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- People v. Lim FoonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- Litvinuk v. LitvinukCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.