Cal. Ct. App. 1st Dist. · Court of Appeal opinion · January 1, 2021
Related by Seller ProceedsCourt record Court of Appeal opinion
Pollock v. Tiano — California Court of Appeal
California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Three · 253 Cal.App.2d 183
AmountNot statedAmount not stated in reviewed source.
ResultCourt of Appeal opinionCourt ruling
HingeSeller ProceedsTeaches sloppy escrow instructions cannot bind sellers to subordinate beyond the written $96,000 construction cap — buyers must perform the subordination deal they actually negotiated.
SourceCourt opinionPublished opinion
File-record question
Teaches sloppy escrow instructions cannot bind sellers to subordinate beyond the written $96,000 construction cap — buyers must perform the subordination deal they actually negotiated.
Limit before takeaway
Published appellate opinion only. Protective Equity Trust v. Bybee (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 139 (supporting link) on enforcing subordination only for agreed construction loans.
- Court / region
- Cal. Ct. App. 2d Dist.
- Case number
- 253 Cal.App.2d 183
- Filed
- January 1, 1967
- Source record
- Court opinion
- Procedural posture
- Court of Appeal opinion
- Money movement stage
- Seller proceeds stage
- Record gap
- Payee 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 sellers were not in default for refusing to subordinate when the buyer's proposed loan exceeded the escrow cap and used proceeds to acquire additional land rather than a true construction loan disclosed up front.
What it hinged on
Seller Proceeds. Teaches sloppy escrow instructions cannot bind sellers to subordinate beyond the written $96,000 construction cap — buyers must perform the subordination deal they actually negotiated.
Amount involved
Amount not stated in reviewed source.
Result
Court of Appeal opinion
Why this belongs here
Teaches sloppy escrow instructions cannot bind sellers to subordinate beyond the written $96,000 construction cap — buyers must perform the subordination deal they actually negotiated.
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 sloppy escrow instructions cannot bind sellers to subordinate beyond the written $96,000 construction cap — buyers must perform the subordination deal they actually negotiated.
Timeline
FiledJanuary 1, 1967
Posture checked2026-05-31
Reviewed for Escrow Cases2026-05-31
Topics
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. Protective Equity Trust v. Bybee (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 139 (supporting link) on enforcing subordination only for agreed construction loans.
Reviewed California court records with source links. Allegations are not findings.