Olsan v. Comora

140 Cal. Rptr. 835 (1977)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P obtained a money judgment against D for the sum of $382,886 plus costs. By means of an execution and garnishment, P collected $36,560 from D out of a pending escrow. P instituted a receivership proceeding with an order ex parte to show cause why a receiver should not be appointed to marshal and disburse D's assets to satisfy the judgment. By document P showed the court that demand was made upon D to pay the judgment, but D refused; that P, as the judgment creditor, is unable to levy execution upon D's earnings, and that the only process available to enforce payment is by the appointment of a receiver who would collect D's earnings and disburse the funds to P toward the satisfaction of the judgment in accordance with section 690.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The second document discussed the various tricks used by D such as giving his mother in law a trust deed promissory note on apartment property with an assignment of rents clause wherein it was impossible for D to prove collusion. The declaration that D is a practicing dentist, and that his accounts receivable was subject to a factoring arrangement and that a judgment creditor would have great difficulty in collecting a judgment. D also bragged to P that she would have great difficulty locating any of his assets that were subject to levy. Also because of these difficulties in locating assets subject to levy, P decided to assign the judgment for collection. P claimed that a receiver would be the only feasible way to enforce P's rights under the judgment. The court ex parte appointed Robinson as receiver. D appealed.