Cal. Ct. App. 2d Dist. Div. 6 · Court of Appeal opinion · January 1, 2007
Related by Seller Proceeds + Disbursement Authorization · Seller ProceedsCourt record Court of Appeal opinion
Collins v. Home Savings — California Court of Appeal
California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division One · 205 Cal.App.2d 86
AmountNot statedAmount not stated in reviewed source.
ResultCourt of Appeal opinionCourt ruling
HingeSeller ProceedsTeaches Van Nuys subdivision escrows: lenders and title companies cannot expand subordination by a later blanket agreement when construction disbursements violate the original escrow instruction limits.
SourceCourt opinionPublished opinion
File-record question
Teaches Van Nuys subdivision escrows: lenders and title companies cannot expand subordination by a later blanket agreement when construction disbursements violate the original escrow instruction limits.
Limit before takeaway
Published appellate opinion only. Jones v. Sacramento Savings (1967) 248 Cal.App.2d 522 (supporting link) on conditional subordination in construction escrows.
- Court / region
- Cal. Ct. App. 2d Dist.
- Case number
- 205 Cal.App.2d 86
- Filed
- January 1, 1962
- Source record
- Court opinion
- Procedural posture
- Court of Appeal opinion
- Money movement stage
- Seller proceeds stage
- Record gap
- Release-decision gap
- Strongest reviewed source
- Published opinion
- Allegation / finding status
- Court ruling
- Disposition
- Court of Appeal opinion
- Last posture checked
- 2026-05-31
- Reviewed
- 2026-05-31
What happened
Court held a title-company subordination rider did not waive the sellers' original escrow subordination caps when the construction lender disbursed loan proceeds for off-site work, points, and contractor fees not covered by the purchase-money trust deed.
What it hinged on
Seller Proceeds. Teaches Van Nuys subdivision escrows: lenders and title companies cannot expand subordination by a later blanket agreement when construction disbursements violate the original escrow instruction limits.
Amount involved
Amount not stated in reviewed source.
Result
Court of Appeal opinion
Why this belongs here
Teaches Van Nuys subdivision escrows: lenders and title companies cannot expand subordination by a later blanket agreement when construction disbursements violate the original escrow instruction limits.
Documents to inspect
- Seller instructions
- Authorization request
- Callback log
- Wire confirmation
- Closing statement
- Escrow instructions
This list is inferred from the topic pattern, not asserted as an extracted document list for this case.
What the file needed to show
Current reviewed metadata frames the file issue this way:
Teaches Van Nuys subdivision escrows: lenders and title companies cannot expand subordination by a later blanket agreement when construction disbursements violate the original escrow instruction limits.
Timeline
FiledJanuary 1, 1962
Posture checked2026-05-31
Reviewed for Escrow Cases2026-05-31
Topics
Seller Proceeds·Disbursement Authorization
Related patterns
Related records are selected from shared topics, hinge category, court type, and posture. They are discovery aids, not claims that the facts or results match.
Continue research
Open a related reviewed-record search or save this trail when the file-record question is worth revisiting.
Source record
What this record does not show
This reviewed record does not show a court finding that any company or person did anything wrong unless the linked source expressly says so. Read the primary source for allegations, posture, and outcome.
Limit: Published appellate opinion only. Jones v. Sacramento Savings (1967) 248 Cal.App.2d 522 (supporting link) on conditional subordination in construction escrows.
Reviewed California court records with source links. Allegations are not findings.