Legal Opinion

Ames v. Paley

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 30, 2001No. B137620PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KLEIN, P. J.

Defendant and appellant Stephen Paley (Paley) appeals a postjudgment order in favor of plaintiffs and respondents Martha Rose Ames, Rose J. Schurter, as trustee of the Rose J. Schurter Revocable Trust, and Rojo Corporation (hereafter plaintiffs), modifying the judgment so as to make interest thereon retroactive.

The essential issue presented is whether the trial court had the inherent power to modify the judgment to correct an omitted term pertaining to the date Paley’s promissory note obligation would commence.

*670In granting the earlier motion for entry of judgment pursuant to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Nathanson v. MurphyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  2. Hansen v. HansenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Dakota Payphone, LLC v. AlcarazCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  2. American Express Centurion Bank v. Silkey CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2021
  3. Estate of DouglasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
  4. Harper v. Poortinga CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2021
  5. Machado v. MyersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019

3 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