1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.Rptr.2d
  4. 132 Cal.Rptr.2d
  5. 132 Cal.Rptr.2d 106 (2003)
 

GOODMAN v. WILLIAMS

No. B156080.

132 Cal.Rptr.2d 106 (2003)

107 Cal.App.4th 294

Ronald D. GOODMAN, et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Richard D. WILLIAMS, et al., Defendants and Respondents.

Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Eight.

Review Denied June 18, 2003.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Okazaki Law Offices and Brian K. Okazaki, San Juan Capistrano, for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

Rosman & Germain and Daniel L. Germain, Los Angeles, for Defendant and Respondent Richard D. Williams.

Richard D. Williams, Los Angeles, in pro. per., and for Defendant and Respondent Brenda K. Williams.

BOLAND, J.

SUMMARY

This appeal raises an issue of statutory construction. Does the Improvement Act of 1911 allow the holder of a newly-apportioned improvement bond to maintain a foreclosure action based on unpaid apportioned penalties that accrued under a predecessor bond, if the property owner has tendered the apportioned principal and the delinquent interest on the predecessor bond, but refuses to pay the penalties? We conclude the answer is "yes."

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