Legal Opinion
Azure Ltd. v. I-Flow Corp.
California Supreme Court
Decided July 16, 2009No. S164884PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CHIN, J.
The Unclaimed Property Law (UPL) (Code Civ. Proc., § 1500 et seq.)1 requires corporations to deliver to the State Controller (the Contoller) a duplicate certificate of unclaimed corporate stock in specified circumstances. Section 1532, subdivision (d), provides that any “holder” of that unclaimed stock “shall be relieved from all liability of every kind to any person ... for any losses or damages resulting to that person by the issuance and delivery to the Controller of the duplicate certificate . . . .” We granted review to determine the nature and scope of this immunity. We…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
- Douglas Aircraft Co. v. CranstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Fong v. WestlyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- FOUNDATION FOR TAXPAYER RIGHTS v. Nextel CommunicationsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Harris v. WestlyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State ex rel. McCann v. Bank of America, N.A.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Weingarten Realty Investors v. ChiangCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Azure Limited v. I-Flow Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2012
- Casiopea Bovet, LLC v. Chiang, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- (PS) Ashford v. YeeDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.