Priest v. Progressive Savings & Loan Ass'n

Ninth Circuit

Priest v. Progressive Savings & Loan Ass'n

725 F.2d 477

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 30, 1984

DocketNos. 82-5321, 82-5392

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 725 F.2d 477 (Priest v. Progressive Savings & Loan Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Priest v. Progressive Savings & Loan Ass'n, 725 F.2d 477 (9th Cir. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

The amended opinion, 712 F.2d 1326, in these matters is further amended by inserting the following wording commencing at the final two lines on page 3750 of the slipsheet and continuing until the wording now found at line 4 of page 3751 resumes, at line 3 column 1 page 1329 of 712 F.2d and continuing until the wording found at line 10 resumes:

the test of New Britain. We agree with the bankruptcy judge in Priest that under the current California statute, “a lien cannot arise prior to the taking of any administrative steps to establish the lien.” The mere receipt of a delinquent State tax return under the present scheme is too vague and indefinite.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The amended opinion, 712 F.2d 1326, in these matters is further amended by inserting the following wording commencing at the final two lines on page 3750 of the slipsheet and continuing until the wording now found at line 4 of page 3751 resumes, at line 3 column 1 page 1329 of 712 F.2d and continuing until the wording found at line 10 resumes:

the test of New Britain. We agree with the bankruptcy judge in Priest that under the current California statute, “a lien cannot arise prior to the taking of any administrative steps to establish the lien.” The mere receipt of a delinquent State tax return under the present scheme is too vague and indefinite.

In Re Albert Priest, Jr., Debtor. Albert Priest, Jr. v. Progressive Savings & Loan Association, a Corporation, Trusten E. Apperson and Janet J. Apperson, Husband and Wife, West Whittier Paint Co., Western Medical Commercial Exchange, Inc., a Corporation, State of California, State Board of Equalization, Guadalupe Priest, Wife of Herein, Curtis B. Danning, Interim Trustee, Internal Revenue Service, United States of America, State of California, Employment Development Department, Professional Escrow Services, a California Corporation v. Esther B. Mendelsohn, Robert Muchinikoff, Anita R. Muchnikoff, Robert Muchnikoff and Anita Muchnikoff Dba Bob's Luncheonette and Does 1 Through 10, Inclusive, State of California, Employment Development Department, Internal Revenue Service

725 F.2d 477 (Ninth Circuit, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

725 F.2d 477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/priest-v-progressive-savings-loan-assn-ca9-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack