Legal Opinion

Saba v. Stroup

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 16, 1999No. A085812PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

STRANKMAN, P. J.

A judgment creditor garnished cash seized by a county sheriff during an arrest of the judgment debtor on an unrelated criminal matter. The judgment debtor claimed a public policy exemption for *1256property seized by law enforcement officers from an arrestee. (Emmanuel v. Sichofsky (1926) 198 Cal. 713, 715 [247 P. 205, 48 A.L.R. 580].) The trial court denied the debtor’s claim of exemption and ordered the cash released to the creditor. We reverse the order.

Facts

In 1991, respondent Nora E. Saba was renting a room at Nevada’s Kit Kat Guest Ranch where women “entertain guests…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Coffee v. HaynesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Emmanuel v. SichofskyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Golden Gate Candy Products Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. WillieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  2. People v. BurkettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  3. People v. BurkettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API