Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Bluxome Street Associates v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company

Court of Appeal of California
206 Cal. App. 3d 1149 (1988)


Facts

Eric Woods (plaintiff) won a $582,500 settlement resulting from a legal-malpractice suit. The settlement proceeds were deposited into a trust account held by the law firm that had represented Woods in the suit, Hassard, Bonnington, Rogers & Huber (Hassard). Thereafter, Woods executed a security agreement granting a security interest in the settlement to Flynn & Stewart (Flynn) (defendant), another law firm that had provided legal services to Woods. Flynn filed a financing statement with the secretary of state, attempting to perfect the security interest under Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Article 9 requirements. Hassard, Flynn, and other creditors, including Haas & Najarian (Haas) (defendant) and Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company (Fireman’s Fund) (defendant), each sought to enforce a lien on the settlement funds. Woods filed a motion for an order determining the priorities of the claimed liens. The trial court ordered disbursement of $352,562.14 to Hassard based on a retainer agreement, $72,500 to Charles Schilling, and the remaining proceeds to Flynn. The trial court determined that, although Haas and Fireman’s Fund had valid liens, the liens with priority had already consumed all available settlement proceeds. Haas and Fireman’s Fund appealed, arguing that (1) Flynn’s UCC-compliant financing statement did not perfect Flynn’s lien, because Article 9 was inapplicable to liens on tort claims; and (2) Haas’s and Fireman’s Fund’s liens were therefore superior to Flynn’s lien.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Strankman, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.