What is a Complaint in Interpleader?

Useful Rulings on Complaint in Interpleader

Recent Rulings on Complaint in Interpleader

ACCREDITED SURETY AND CASUALTY COMPANY, INC., A CORPORATION VS EDWARD URBAN, ET AL.

“An interpleader action is traditionally viewed as two suits: one between the stakeholder and the claimants to determine the stakeholder's right to interplead, and the other among the claimants to determine who shall receive the funds interpleaded ... As against the stakeholder, claimants may raise only matters which go to whether the suit is properly one for interpleader; i.e., whether the elements of an interpleader action are present.” (State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 28, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

THE MORTGAGE LAW FIRM, PLC VS ALL CLAIMANTS TO SURPLUS PROCEEDS AFTER THE TRUSTEE'S SALE OF THE REAL PROPERTY

(The Claim to Petition and Interpleader filed with the Court on February 26, 2020 indicates that Chandler does not dispute the FTB claim in the sum of $52,900.28, and seeks the balance, $337,358.49).

  • Hearing

    Sep 25, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ESTATE OF LAURENCE O PILGERAM

. ¶71] Alcor entered into the settlement agreement in the interpleader action but then Kurt refused to release the funds, taking the position in the civil action that the agreement that ended the interpleader action did not resolve the issues in the interpleader. [Id.] Parks points out that the November 12, 2015 settlement agreement in the interpleader expressly states that the funds would remain in escrow until either a court order or a written agreement for distribution of those funds.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

ALCOR LIFE EXTENSION FOUNDATION VS KARL E PILGERAM ET AL

On February 1, 2015, in order to release it from further responsibility for the life insurance proceeds, Jackson National Life filed a complaint in interpleader in the United States District Court, Central District of California, Case No. 2:15-cv-4975.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

GARDEN CITY, INC. V. ERIC SWALLOW, ET AL.

For these reasons, The Court solely takes judicial notice of the stipulated settlement and request for dismissal from the administrative proceeding and interpleader action, respectively. Swallow’s request for judicial notice is GRANED as to those two documents and is otherwise DENIED. III. Demurrer Although Tierney demurs on two distinct legal grounds, his analysis is blended and he appears to conflate the standards for each ground for demurrer at times.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORP. VS ALL CLAIMANTS TO SURPLUS FUNDS

The clerk may charge a reasonable fee for the performance of activities pursuant to this subdivision equal to the fee for filing an interpleader action pursuant to Chapter 5.8 (commencing with Section 70600) of Title 8 of the Government Code. Upon deposit of that portion of the sale proceeds that cannot be distributed by due diligence, the trustee shall be discharged of further responsibility for the disbursement of sale proceeds.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

RICHARD KUEHNE VS DANNY LEE ROWLETT, JR, ET AL.

Paloci, III, Trustee of Alliance Holding Trust, filed a cross-complaint for interpleader. The interpleader alleges that upon the completion of the sale for Alliance Metal Products, Inc., the parties agreed to place the Colorado property into a trust to be held until March 31, 2019—the expiration of the option agreement.[1] Cross-Complainant contends that the parties dispute ownership of the property prompted the complaint in interpleader.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

WESCO INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION VS PACIFICA TILE & STONE, INC., A CORPORATION, ET AL.

“An interpleader action is traditionally viewed as two suits: one between the stakeholder and the claimants to determine the stakeholder's right to interplead, and the other among the claimants to determine who shall receive the funds interpleaded ... As against the stakeholder, claimants may raise only matters which go to whether the suit is properly one for interpleader; i.e., whether the elements of an interpleader action are present.” (State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

STEVEN WENER DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF AGENT ZIP INC VS JOHNSON

Opcity is directed to separately file the [PROPOSED] COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION AND INTERPLEADER with the Court and promptly effect service on Defendants in Intervention.

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2020

YAMIRA MONTANO MENDEZ VS MARIA MONTANO, ET AL.

A party seeking interpleader must be free from blame in causing the controversy and where he stands as a wrongdoer with respect to the subject matter of the suit or any of its claimants, he cannot have relief by interpleader. (See Farmers Irrigating Ditch & Reservoir Co. v. Kane (1988) 845 F.2d 229, 232.) Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s Demurrer to the Fourth Cause of Action is SUSTAINED without leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Sep 04, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

TITAN INSURANCE VS. ALVARADO

However, it appears from the Clerk’s Certificate of Mailing/Electronic Service that Defendant-In-Interpleader Esmeralda Palencia as Parent for Ruben Palencia did not receive notice of the new hearing date. (Ibid.) Thus, the Motion is CONTINUED to October 6, 2020, Dept. C11, at 2 pm. The moving party is ordered to give notice to all parties.

  • Hearing

    Sep 04, 2020

JUST PNP INC. VS XIAOXIONG YE, ET AL.

“An interpleader action is traditionally viewed as two suits: one between the stakeholder and the claimants to determine the stakeholder's right to interplead, and the other among the claimants to determine who shall receive the funds interpleaded . . . As against the stakeholder, claimants may raise only matters which go to whether the suit is properly one for interpleader; i.e., whether the elements of an interpleader action are present.” (State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 04, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

XERA HEALTH LLC VS SCHEELE

Xera Health did not oppose CSVBA's interpleader motion. ROA 218. Defendants Scheele and Nova-Life filed opposition. ROA 217, 220. Following a hearing on November 1, 2019, the court granted CSVBA's motion. ROA 224, 226. Thereafter, CSVBA sought an order striking counts two, three, five, eight, nine, ten, and eleven of the Scheele/Nova-Life first amended cross-complaint in intervention ("FACCI"), pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16.

  • Hearing

    Sep 03, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

XERA HEALTH LLC VS SCHEELE

Xera Health did not oppose CSVBA's interpleader motion. ROA 218. Defendants Scheele and Nova-Life filed opposition. ROA 217, 220. Following a hearing on November 1, 2019, the court granted CSVBA's motion. ROA 224, 226. Thereafter, CSVBA sought an order striking counts two, three, five, eight, nine, ten, and eleven of the Scheele/Nova-Life first amended cross-complaint in intervention ("FACCI"), pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16.

  • Hearing

    Sep 03, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

OLD REPUBLIC SURETY COMPANY, A CORPORATION VS STATE WIDE CONSTRUCTION & REMODELING, INC., A CORPORATION, ET AL.

.: 19STLC02287 Hearing Date: September 1, 2020 [TENTATIVE] order RE: Cross-Dedendants state wide construction & Remoldeling Inc. and yossi grimberg’s motion to set aside entry of default Background On March 4, 2019, Plaintiff Old Republic Surety Company initiated this action with the filing of the complaint in interpleader.[1] On April 17, 2019, defendant Ramin Delavari (“Cross-Complainant”) filed the instant cross-complaint.

  • Hearing

    Sep 01, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ESTATE OF LAURENCE O PILGERAM

. ¶71] Alcor entered into the settlement agreement in the interpleader action but then Kurt refused to release the funds, taking the position in the civil action that the agreement that ended the interpleader action did not resolve the issues in the interpleader. [Id.] Parks points out that the November 12, 2015 settlement agreement in the interpleader expressly states that the funds would remain in escrow until either a court order or a written agreement for distribution of those funds.

  • Hearing

    Aug 27, 2020

SOLEYMAN COHENSEDGH VS PURE SOLAR CO., ET AL.

ANALYSIS ACIC filed an interpleader action through its cross-complaint and seeks to be dismissed. “The purpose of interpleader is to prevent a multiplicity of suits and double vexation. [Citation.]” (Principal Life Ins. Co. v. Peterson (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 676, 682 [quoting City of Morgan Hill v. Brown (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 1114, 1122, fn. omitted].)

  • Hearing

    Aug 26, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ACCREDITED SURETY AND CASUALTY COMPANY, INC. VS ENERGY ENTERPRISES USA, ET AL.

“An interpleader action is traditionally viewed as two suits: one between the stakeholder and the claimants to determine the stakeholder's right to interplead, and the other among the claimants to determine who shall receive the funds interpleaded ... As against the stakeholder, claimants may raise only matters which go to whether the suit is properly one for interpleader; i.e., whether the elements of an interpleader action are present.” (State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v.

  • Hearing

    Aug 26, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

THE WOLF FIRM, A LAW CORPORATION VS ALL CLAIMANTS TO SURPLUS FUNDS AFTER TRUSTEE?S SALE OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT

But if the trustee has failed to determine the priority of the claims within 90 days following the 30 day notice period, within 10 days thereafter, the trustee must either deposit the funds with the court clerk or file an interpleader action. Civ. Code § 2924j(b).

  • Hearing

    Aug 19, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

CAPITAL TRUST ESCROW, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS TEHAL SINGH THIND, ET AL.

“An interpleader action is traditionally viewed as two suits: one between the stakeholder and the claimants to determine the stakeholder's right to interplead, and the other among the claimants to determine who shall receive the funds interpleaded ... As against the stakeholder, claimants may raise only matters which go to whether the suit is properly one for interpleader, i.e., whether the elements of an interpleader action are present.” (State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v.

  • Hearing

    Aug 17, 2020

ASHLEY POLSELLI VS, GREGORY JOHNSON, ET AL

The purpose of interpleader is to prevent a multiplicity of suits and double vexation. ( Hancock Oil Co. v. Hopkins. supra, 24 Cal.2d at p. 508,) “The right to the remedy by interpleader is founded, however, not on the consideration that a [person] may be subjected to double liability, but on the fact that he is threatened with double vexation in respect to one liability.” (Pfister v. Wade (1880) 56 Cal. 43, 47.) (City of Morgan Hill v. Brown (1999) 71 Ca1.App.4fl1 1114, 1122.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

SOUTHWEST LAW CENTER, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION AKA SOUTHWEST LEGAL GROUP VS LUCERO MIRAMONTES, ET AL.

ANALYSIS: On June 26, 2019, Plaintiff Southwest Law Center, a professional corporation, aka Southwest Legal Group (“Cross-Defendant”) filed the instant action for interpleader against Defendants Lucero Miramontes, Accident Center, and Discovery Diagnostics, Inc. On October 15, 2019, Defendant Discovery Diagnostics, Inc. (“Cross-Complainant”) filed a Cross-Complaint for (1) breach of contract; and (2) fraud and deceit.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

KANSAS CITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY VS. ALBAYALDE

s (Plaintiff) motion to be discharged from interpleader action as follows: "When a person may be subject to conflicting claims for money or property, the person may bring an interpleader action to compel the claimants to litigate their claims among themselves. (Code Civ. Proc., § 386, subd. (b).) Once the person admits liability and deposits the money with the court, he or she is discharged from liability and freed from the obligation of participating in the litigation between the claimants."

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

FIVE STAR PLUMBING AND FIRE SUPPLIES, INC. VS IGNACIO RESENDEZ REYES, ET AL.

IS CONDITIONALLY GRANTED AS TO THE CROSS-COMPLAINT’S THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR INTERPLEADER. INTERPLEADER FUNDS OF $13,500.00 ARE TO BE DEPOSITED WITH THIRTY (30) DAYS. A HEARING TO DETERMINE THE DISPOSITION OF FUNDS IS SET FOR JANUARY 13, 2021 AT ____ AM IN DEPARTMENT 26 IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. EACH CLAIMANT MUST FILE A WRITTEN CLAIM WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THIS ORDER; THE WRITTEN CLAIM SHOULD INCLUDE A DECLARATION SETTING FORTH THE BASIS FOR THE CLAIM OF OWNERSHIP OR INTEREST.

  • Hearing

    Aug 05, 2020

FIVE STAR PLUMBING AND FIRE SUPPLIES, INC. VS IGNACIO RESENDEZ REYES, ET AL.

IS CONDITIONALLY GRANTED AS TO THE CROSS-COMPLAINT’S THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR INTERPLEADER. INTERPLEADER FUNDS OF $13,500.00 ARE TO BE DEPOSITED WITH THIRTY (30) DAYS. A HEARING TO DETERMINE THE DISPOSITION OF FUNDS IS SET FOR JANUARY 13, 2021 AT 10 AM IN DEPARTMENT 26 IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. EACH CLAIMANT MUST FILE A WRITTEN CLAIM WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THIS ORDER; THE WRITTEN CLAIM SHOULD INCLUDE A DECLARATION SETTING FORTH THE BASIS FOR THE CLAIM OF OWNERSHIP OR INTEREST.

  • Hearing

    Aug 05, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 37     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.