1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. B.R.
  4. 93 B.R.
  5. 93 B.R. 203 (1988)
 

IN RE OROSCO

BAP No. NC-87-1933 VJMo, Bankruptcy No. 4-86-01970-C, Adv. No. 4-86-0284-AC.

93 B.R. 203 (1988)

In re James R. OROSCO, dba Jorsco Investment Co., Debtor. CALIFORNIA FIRST BANK, Appellant, v. Robert E. GRIFFIN, Julia A. Griffin, Appellees James R. Orosco, individually and dba Jorsco Real Estate Development and Investment Co., and as Jorsco Development Company, Orosco Construction Co., a California corporation, individually, and dba Merit Homes, California First Bank, a California corporation, Robert E. Griffin, Julia A. Griffin, Taylor-Thompson Associates, Greg Owen, individually and dba Dynamic Air, Amfac Distribution Corp., a corporation, individually and dba Amfac Plumbing Supply Company, Geary Pacific Corp., a corporation, Jerry Ninnis, Western Title Insurance Company, a corporation, MacKinley, Winnacker, McNeil, A.I.A. and Associates, Inc., a corporation, Safeco Title Insurance Company, a California corporation, Syar Industries, Inc., a California corporation, Henry M. Beaver, individually and dba B & W Underground Construction, Vintage Tile, Inc., a corporation, Ticor Title Insurance Company, a corporation, Electric Supply of Salinas, Inc., individually and dba Electric Supply of Vallejo, Sybil J. Cook, General Electric Company, Green Valley Nursery, Gomini, Cell-Crete Corporation, Build-Tek, Inc. and Cal-Concrete Company, Defendants.

United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, Ninth Circuit.

Decided September 30, 1988.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Cary L. Dictor, Oakland, Cal., for appellant.

Curtis Singleton, Fairfield, Cal., for appellees.

Before VOLINN, JONES and MOOREMAN, Bankruptcy Judges.

OPINION

VOLINN, Bankruptcy Judge:

First Bank of California (appellant) brings this appeal from the bankruptcy court's granting of summary judgment in favor of Robert and Julia Griffin, husband and wife (appellees). The essential question presented involves who should bear the risk of loss caused by a forged and fraudulently recorded title document. Co-ordinate with this issue is whether the grant of summary judgment was precluded by virtue of factual issues...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases