Professional Conduct

     California Rules of Professional Conduct 5-100 provides "A member shall not threaten to present criminal, administrative, or disciplinary charges to obtain an advantage in a civil dispute."

 

Login Form






Lost Password?
No account yet? Register

Syndicate

Home
WESTFOUR v. CALIFORNIA FIRST BANK PDF Print E-mail
Written by Curtis W. Herron   
Sunday, 15 January 2006
Article Index
WESTFOUR v. CALIFORNIA FIRST BANK
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
WESTFOUR CORPORATION, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA FIRST BANK, Defendant and Respondent.

COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO.

3 Cal. App. 4th 1554; 5 Cal. Rptr. 2d 394;

February 28, 1992, Decided

SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: Rehearing Denied March 30, 1992.

Review Denied June 11, 1992

PRIOR HISTORY: Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, No. 877031, Jerome T. Benson, Judge.

COUNSEL:

Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro, Paul L. Warner and Susan F. Winer for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Leland, Parachini, Steinberg, Flinn, Matzger & Melnick, Steven R. Walker, Jeffrey H. Lowenthal and Richard J. Wallace for Defendant and Respondent.

JUDGES: Opinion by Benson, J., with Kline, P. J., and Peterson, J., concurring.

OPINION BY: BENSON, J.

OPINION:

Westfour Corporation (Westfour) appeals from the trial court's judgment in favor of California First Bank (California First). Westfour contends the trial court erred in finding Westfour's mechanic's lien claims against California First barred by the statute of limitations. We agree and reverse.

 


 
< Prev   Next >

Who's Online

Newsletter

Subscribe to a newsletter:
Name:
Email address :
© 2008 Welcome to the Law Office of Curtis W. Herron
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.