Procedural Posture
Defendant debtor's husband appealed a judgment from the Superior Court of San Mateo County (California), which ruled in favor of plaintiff trustee in an action brought by the trustee against the debtor's husband to recover the alleged value of an automobile given to the debtor's husband by the debtor, whom had declared bankruptcy and had not satisfied a judgment against her in a tort action.
Overview
After a judgment was entered against the debtor in a tort action, the debtor filed a voluntary petition in bankruptcy and later was declared a bankrupt. The debtor later transferred her automobile to her husband without consideration. The trustee commenced an action to recover the alleged value of the automobile given to the husband. The trustee alleged that the debtor, by reason of the transfer of the automobile to the debtor's husband, became insolvent and without any assets with which to pay the judgment in the tort action. The trial court made findings in favor of the trustee and against the debtor's husband. The debtor's husband appealed and claimed there was no evidence to support the finding on the trustee's allegations. On appeal, the court held that the findings of the trial court were supported by the evidence. The debtor was under the obligation not to injure the tort judgment creditor, that the debtor was charged with the violation of that obligation, that the charge ripened into a judgment, and that from the date of the accident until the date she filed her petition in bankruptcy the burdens of that obligation continued.
Outcome: elements of conversion
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, which had ruled in favor of the trustee in its action against the debtor's husband to recover the alleged value of an automobile.
Procedural Posture
Defendant accommodation maker appealed from the judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County (California), which entered judgment for plaintiff, the creditor's assignee, in the assignee's action to recover the balance due on a promissory note executed by defendant debtors and the accommodation maker.
Overview
The creditor had sold property to certain sellers and obtained trust deeds on the property. The sellers sold the property to the debtors, and the creditor agreed to reconvey the trust deeds to the sellers in exchange for the debtors obtaining construction loans secured by new trust deeds. The debtors had promised to make improvements on the property with the proceeds. The debtors did not use the proceeds as promised, and because of a foreclosure of the first deeds, the new trust deed in favor of the creditor was rendered valueless. The creditor brought an action against the debtors and the debtors induced the creditor to accept a promissory note secured by a trust deed on certain other property owned by the debtors. It was on this promissory note that the accommodation maker signed his name. The maker claimed that he could not be held liable because a deficiency judgment could not lie for failure of a purchaser to complete his contract of sale. The court affirmed and held that the judgment was proper because the deed of trust was not given to secure payment of the purchase price, but was given in compromise of the creditor's pending suit for fraud or breach of contract.
Outcome
The court affirmed the trial court judgment.