Motion to vacate sister state judgment in California

A motion to vacate a sister state judgment in California is the topic of this blog post. Vacating a sister state judgment in California is authorized by Code of Civil Procedure section 1710.40.

The motion to vacate must normally be filed within 30 days after service of notice of entry of the sister judgment unless the judgment debtor was either not served or not properly served with notice of entry of the sister state judgment, or was not properly served with process in the sister state action.

Code of Civil Procedure section 1710.40(a) states that, “A judgment entered pursuant to this chapter may be vacated on any ground which would be a defense to an action in this state on the sister state judgment, including the ground that the amount of interest accrued on the sister state judgment and included in the judgment entered pursuant to this chapter is incorrect.”

The Law Revision Comment for section 1710.40(a) states that, “Common defenses to enforcement of a sister state judgment include the following: 1 the judgment is not final and unconditional . . . ; 2 the judgment was obtained by extrinsic fraud; 3 the judgment was rendered in excess of jurisdiction; 4 the judgment is not enforceable in the state of rendition; 5 the plaintiff is guilty of misconduct; 6 the judgment has already been paid; and 7 suit on the judgment is barred by the statute of limitations in the state where enforcement is sought”. Law Revision Com. com., 19A West’s Ann. Code Civ. Proc. (1982) foll. § 1710.40, p. 694.

And a California Court of Appeal has stated that the sister state must have had jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter, and all interested parties must have been given reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard before the sister state judgment should be given full faith and credit by a California Court.

It should be noted that the party filing a motion to vacate a sister state judgment has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence that it is entitled to relief.

Filing a motion to vacate a sister state judgment stays enforcement until the motion to vacate has been determined. See Code of Civil Procedure section 1710.50(a)(3).

Attorneys or parties in California who would like to view a portion of a sample motion to vacate a sister state judgment in California sold by the author can see below.

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation. If you are in need of assistance with any California or Federal litigation matters, Mr. Burman is available on a freelance basis. Mr. Burman may be contacted by e-mail at DivParalgl@yahoo.com for more information. He accepts payments through PayPal which means that you can pay using most credit or debit cards.

*Do you want to use this article on your website, blog or e-zine? You can, as long as you include this blurb with it: “Stan Burman is the author of over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation and is the author of a free weekly legal newsletter. You can receive 10 free gifts just for subscribing. Just visit http://freeweeklylegalnewsletter.gr8.com/ for more information.

Follow the author on Twitter at: https://twitter.com/LegalDocsPro

You can view sample legal document packages for sale by going to http://www.legaldocspro.com/downloads.aspx

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

Paying rent in cash in California

Paying your rent in cash in California is the topic of this blog post. Many California landlords demand that all tenants pay their rent in cash each and every month. However the law in California states that a residential landlord in California cannot require any tenant to pay their rent in cash at the beginning of a lease as long as the premises being rented are residential.

Unless the tenant has previously paid the landlord with a bad check, demanding that a tenant in California pay their rent in cash is prohibited by California law. Even if the tenant has written a bad check before the landlord must comply with certain requirements in order to demand rent in cash.

However there are exceptions to this general rule as will be shown by this blog post.

California Civil Code section 1947.3(a)(1) states in pertinent part that “a landlord or a landlord’s agent shall allow a tenant to pay rent and deposit of security by at least one form of payment that is neither cash nor electronic funds transfer.”

However California law does provide for an exception to this rule if the tenant has previously presented the landlord with a bad check or another bad form of payment. Civil Code section 1947.3(a)2) states in pertinent part that, “A landlord or a landlord’s agent may demand or require cash as the exclusive form of payment of rent or deposit of security if the tenant has previously attempted to pay the landlord or landlord’s agent with a check drawn on insufficient funds or the tenant has instructed the drawee to stop payment on a check, draft, or order for the payment of money.”

In those situations a landlord in California may require that a residential tenant pay their rent in cash as California Civil Code section 1947.3(a)(2) further states that, “If the landlord chooses to demand or require cash payment under these circumstances, the landlord shall give the tenant a written notice stating that the payment instrument was dishonored and informing the tenant that the tenant shall pay in cash for a period determined by the landlord, not to exceed three months, and attach a copy of the dishonored instrument to the notice. The notice shall comply with Section 827 if demanding or requiring payment in cash constitutes a change in the terms of the lease.” (Emphasis added.)

Note that Civil Code section 827 requires at least 30 calendar days notice of any change in the terms of the lease. And any such notice must be served in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 1162 which means that the notice must be served in the same manner as a three-day notice.

A tenant cannot waive the provisions of Civil Code section 1947.3 as subdivision (e) states that, “(e) A waiver of the provisions of this section is contrary to public policy, and is void and unenforceable.”

Tenants in California who are faced with a landlord who is demanding that the rent be paid in cash should take the information contained in this blog post into account.

California landlords cannot require a tenant to pay rent in cash for more than three months. After three months they must accept rental payments by other means such as a check or money order.

Attorneys or parties in California who would like to view more than 250 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation offered for sale can click the link shown below.

http://www.scribd.com/LegalDocsPro/documents

Attorneys or parties in California who would like more information on a sample legal document package designed for tenants in California containing over 20 sample documents and selling for only $59.99 can use the link shown below.

http://legaldocspro.net/?page_id=430

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation. If you are in need of assistance with any California or Federal litigation matters, Mr. Burman is available on a freelance basis. Mr. Burman may be contacted by e-mail at DivParalgl@yahoo.com for more information. He accepts payments through PayPal which means that you can pay using most credit or debit cards.

*Do you want to use this article on your website, blog or e-zine? You can, as long as you include this blurb with it: “Stan Burman is the author of over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation and is the author of a free weekly legal newsletter. You can receive 10 free gifts just for subscribing. Just visit http://freeweeklylegalnewsletter.gr8.com/ for more information.

Follow the author on Twitter at: https://twitter.com/LegalDocsPro

You can view sample legal document packages for sale by going to http://www.legaldocspro.com/downloads.aspx

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

Motion to expunge Lis Pendens in California

A motion to expunge a Lis Pendens in California pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 405.30 is the topic of this blog post.   A Lis Pendens is technically known as a notice of pendency of action although the term Lis Pendens is more commonly used, this term is Latin for pending lawsuit. The statutes governing this notice are found in Code of Civil Procedure sections 405.1 through 405.39.

The most common grounds for a motion to expunge a Lis Pendens are that the complaint does not state a real property claim as required by California law. There are other grounds although this blog post will focus on situations where the complaint does not state a real property claim.

Code of Civil Procedure § 405.20 states that, “A party to an action who asserts a real property claim may record a notice of pendency of action in which that real property claim is alleged. The notice may be recorded in the office of the recorder of each county in which all or part of the real property is situated. The notice shall contain the names of all parties to the action and a description of the property affected by the action.”

Code of Civil Procedure § 405.4 states that, “Real property claim” means the cause or causes of action in a pleading which would, if meritorious, affect (a) title to, or the right to possession of, specific real property or (b) the use of an easement identified in the pleading, other than an easement obtained pursuant to statute by any regulated public utility.”

Because the recording of a Lis Pendens against a real property clouds the title, the Lis Pendens procedure is abused quite frequently. As a result several California Courts of Appeal have held that the history of the lis pendens legislation indicates a legislative intent to restrict rather than broaden the application of the remedy.

The California Courts of Appeal have also held that causes of action with equitable liens do not state a real property claim if those causes of action act only as an alternative or collateral means to collect money damages as the real purpose of the statutes is to provide notice of pending litigation and not to provide plaintiffs with more leverage for use in negotiating a settlement.

Causes of action for money only do not state a real property claim in California.

Once a motion to expunge has been filed the burden is on the plaintiff to show that at least one of the causes of action of their complaint states a real property claim. The Court must order the notice expunged if the complaint does not state a real property claim. The prevailing party on the motion to expunge is entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 405.38.

Attorneys or parties in California who would like to view a portion of a 14 page sample motion to expunge a Lis Pendens sold by the author can see below

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation. If you are in need of assistance with any California or Federal litigation matters, Mr. Burman is available on a freelance basis. Mr. Burman may be contacted by e-mail at DivParalgl@yahoo.com for more information. He accepts payments through PayPal which means that you can pay using most credit or debit cards.

To view over 245 sample legal documents for sale by the author of this blog post visit the following link: http://www.scribd.com/LegalDocsPro

*Do you want to use this article on your website, blog or e-zine? You can, as long as you include this blurb with it: “Stan Burman is the author of over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation and is the author of a free weekly legal newsletter. You can receive 10 free gifts just for subscribing. Just visit http://freeweeklylegalnewsletter.gr8.com/ for more information.

Follow the author on Twitter at: https://twitter.com/LegalDocsPro

You can view sample legal document packages for sale by going to http://www.legaldocspro.com/downloads.aspx

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Motion for summary judgment in California

A motion for summary judgment in California pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 437c is the topic of this blog post.

Code of Civil Procedure section 437c(a) states in pertinent part that, “Any party may move for summary judgment in any action or proceeding if it is contended that the action has no merit or that there is no defense to the action or proceeding.”

There are numerous requirements for motions for summary judgment. Any party considering moving for summary judgment should carefully read the entire text of Code of Civil Procedure section 437c to ensure that they have complied with all applicable requirements.

For instance, the party moving for summary judgment must wait until at least 60 days have passed since the general appearance of the party against whom the motion is directed unless the Court orders otherwise. And a minimum of 75 calendar days notice of the hearing must be given. If notice of the motion is given by regular mail at least 5 calendar days must be added to the notice period. Note that there is NO statutory procedure for shortening the notice period for a motion for summary judgment.

And the party moving for summary judgment must submit a separate statement of undisputed material facts with the motion.

The advantage of filing a motion for summary judgment is that if the Court is convinced that there are no triable issues of material facts it must grant the motion as Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(c) states in pertinent part that, “The motion for summary judgment shall be granted if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”

Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(p)(1) and (2) state that for purposes of motions for summary judgment and summary adjudication,

“(1) A plaintiff or cross-complainant has met his or her burden of showing that there is no defense to a cause of action if that party has proved each element of the cause of action entitling the party to judgment on that cause of action. Once the plaintiff or cross-complainant has met that burden, the burden shifts to the defendant or cross-defendant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to that cause of action or a defense thereto. The defendant or cross-defendant may not rely upon the mere allegations or denials of its pleadings to show that a triable issue of material fact exists but, instead, shall set forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to that cause of action or a defense thereto.”

(2) A defendant or cross-defendant has met his or her burden of showing that a cause of action has no merit if that party has shown that one or more elements of the cause of action, even if not separately pleaded, cannot be established, or that there is a complete defense to that cause of action. Once the defendant or cross-defendant has met that burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff or cross-complainant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to that cause of action or a defense thereto. The plaintiff or cross-complainant may not rely upon the mere allegations or denials of its pleadings to show that a triable issue of material fact exists but, instead, shall set forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to that cause of action or a defense thereto.”

Note that the party opposing the motion must produce admissible evidence showing that a triable issue of material fact exists and cannot merely rely on the allegations or denials of their pleadings.

Attorneys or parties in California who would like to view a portion of a sample 19 page motion for summary judgment by a plaintiff in California sold by the author can see below.

Attorneys or parties in California who would like to view a portion of a sample 18 page motion for summary judgment by a defendant in California sold by the author can see below.

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation. If you are in need of assistance with any California or Federal litigation matters, Mr. Burman is available on a freelance basis. Mr. Burman may be contacted by e-mail at DivParalgl@yahoo.com for more information. He accepts payments through PayPal which means that you can pay using most credit or debit cards.

To view over 245 sample legal documents for sale by the author of this blog post visit the following link: http://www.scribd.com/LegalDocsPro

*Do you want to use this article on your website, blog or e-zine? You can, as long as you include this blurb with it: “Stan Burman is the author of over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation and is the author of a free weekly legal newsletter. You can receive 10 free gifts just for subscribing. Just visit http://freeweeklylegalnewsletter.gr8.com/ for more information.

Follow the author on Twitter at: https://twitter.com/LegalDocsPro

You can view sample legal document packages for sale by going to http://www.legaldocspro.com/downloads.aspx

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tax relief price rollback from LegalDocsPro

Are you looking for tax relief in California? April 15 may have come and gone but tax relief is still available. LegaDocsPro is offering tax relief price rollback on all of our documents sold on scribd. Over 90% of documents are now priced at only $15.99 each.

Over 250 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation are available including answers, demurrers, motions to dismiss, motions to quash, oppositions and more!

For more information visit: http://www.scribd.com/LegalDocsPro/documents

#California
#demurrer
#motion
#law
#legal

 

Petition for order determining succession to property in California

A petition for an order determining succession to property in California is the topic of this blog post. This is also known as a summary or simplified probate proceeding as it is much quicker and less expensive than a standard probate proceeding in California.

The statutes in California governing a court order determining succession to property are found in Probate Code Sections 13150 through 13158. A summary probate in California is initiated by the filing of a petition in the superior court for an order determining succession to real or personal property.

The petitioner must wait until at least 40 days have elapsed since the death of the decedent and the gross value of the decedent’s real and personal property in California may not exceed $150,000. See Probate Code section 13151. This limit was only $100,000 prior to January 1, 2012.

Note that a probate referee must complete and sign an inventory and appraisal certifying the amount of the gross value of the estate which must be filed with the petition.

However the value of the estate is calculated using the exclusions listed in Probate Code section 13050 which states in pertinent part that the following property is excluded:

Real property located outside California;

joint tenancy property;

property that goes outright to a surviving spouse;

life insurance, death benefits, and other assets not subject to probate that pass to named beneficiaries;

multiple-party accounts and payable-on-death accounts;

registered manufactured or mobile homes;

any numbered vessel;

registered motor vehicles;

salary including vacation pay due the decedent up to $15,000;

amounts due decedent for services in the armed forces, and

property held in trust, including a revocable living trust.

The simplicity of filing a petition to determine succession to real or personal property is a huge bonus. In some counties a hearing on the petition can be scheduled within 4-6 weeks from filing depending on the court calendar. The cost is much less as there is no publication required in an adjudicated newspaper although notice of the petition must be given to all heirs and beneficiaries listed in any will at least 15 days before the hearing date.

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995. If you are in need of assistance with any California or Federal litigation matters including Probate matters, Mr. Burman is available on a freelance basis. Mr. Burman may be contacted by e-mail at DivParalgl@yahoo.com for more information. He accepts payments through PayPal which means that you can pay using most credit or debit cards.

To view over 255 sample legal documents for sale by the author of this blog post visit the following link: http://www.scribd.com/LegalDocsPro

*Do you want to use this article on your website, blog or e-zine? You can, as long as you include this blurb with it: “Stan Burman is the author of over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation and is the author of a free weekly legal newsletter. You can receive 10 free gifts just for subscribing. Just visit: http://freeweeklylegalnewsletter.gr8.com/

View sample legal document packages for sale here: http://www.legaldocspro.com/downloads.aspx

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

Spousal property petition in California

A spousal property petition in California is the topic of this blog post. Assets inherited by a surviving spouse or registered domestic partner in California can be transferred with a simplified procedure known as a Spousal or Domestic Partner Property Petition.

Probate Code sections 13500 through 13660 govern the passage of property to a surviving spouse without administration. Because the standard proceedings for administration of an estate in California are very costly and take a minimum of 7-8 months in most counties, the spousal property petition is very advantageous and a useful shortcut.

The petition must be submitted to the probate court for approval, however the process is simple and much faster than regular probate. There is no limit on the value of property that can be transferred this way.

The spousal property petition may be filed even though no other proceedings for the administration of the estate are pending. However, if a standard probate proceeding has already been filed and is pending the petition may be filed in that proceeding and may request an order that administration of all or part of the estate is not necessary for the reason that all or part of the estate is property passing to the surviving spouse. See Probate Code § 13650.

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995. If you are in need of assistance with any California or Federal litigation matters including Probate matters, Mr. Burman is available on a freelance basis. Mr. Burman may be contacted by e-mail at DivParalgl@yahoo.com for more information. He accepts payments through PayPal which means that you can pay using most credit or debit cards.

To view over 255 sample legal documents for sale by the author of this blog post visit the following link: http://www.scribd.com/LegalDocsPro

*Do you want to use this article on your website, blog or e-zine? You can, as long as you include this blurb with it: “Stan Burman is the author of over 245 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation and is the author of a free weekly legal newsletter. You can receive 10 free gifts just for subscribing. Just visit: http://freeweeklylegalnewsletter.gr8.com/

View sample legal document packages for sale here: http://www.legaldocspro.com/downloads.aspx

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.