Cal. Ct. App. 1st Dist. · Court of Appeal opinion · January 1, 1986
Related by Disbursement Authorization + Seller Proceeds · Disbursement AuthorizationCourt record Supreme Court opinion
Jones v. Title Guaranty — California Supreme Court
California Supreme Court · L. A. No. 7526
AmountNot statedAmount not stated in reviewed source.
ResultSupreme Court opinionCourt ruling
HingeDisbursement AuthorizationFoundational California rule that escrow holders who release funds without satisfying deposit conditions owe resulting damages — cited throughout later strict-instruction escrow cases.
SourceCourt opinionPublished opinion
File-record question
Foundational California rule that escrow holders who release funds without satisfying deposit conditions owe resulting damages — cited throughout later strict-instruction escrow cases.
Limit before takeaway
Published Supreme Court opinion only. Gallagher v. California Pac. T. & T. Co. (1936) 13 Cal.App.2d 482 (supporting link) applies the same measure-of-damages analysis.
- Court / region
- Cal.
- Case number
- L. A. No. 7526
- Filed
- January 1, 1918
- Source record
- Court opinion
- Procedural posture
- Supreme Court opinion
- Money movement stage
- Seller proceeds stage
- Record gap
- Release-decision gap
- Strongest reviewed source
- Published opinion
- Allegation / finding status
- Court ruling
- Disposition
- Supreme Court opinion
- Last posture checked
- 2026-05-31
- Reviewed
- 2026-05-31
What happened
Court held that when money or property is deposited in escrow on stated conditions and the holder disposes of it without compliance, the depositor may recover damages suffered through that unwarranted act.
What it hinged on
Disbursement Authorization. Foundational California rule that escrow holders who release funds without satisfying deposit conditions owe resulting damages — cited throughout later strict-instruction escrow cases.
Amount involved
Amount not stated in reviewed source.
Result
Supreme Court opinion
Why this belongs here
Foundational California rule that escrow holders who release funds without satisfying deposit conditions owe resulting damages — cited throughout later strict-instruction escrow cases.
Documents to inspect
- Disbursement authorization
- Escrow instructions
- Condition checklist
- Hold notice
- Seller instructions
- Authorization request
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:
Foundational California rule that escrow holders who release funds without satisfying deposit conditions owe resulting damages — cited throughout later strict-instruction escrow cases.
Timeline
FiledJanuary 1, 1918
Posture checked2026-05-31
Reviewed for Escrow Cases2026-05-31
Topics
Disbursement Authorization·Seller Proceeds
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 Supreme Court opinion only. Gallagher v. California Pac. T. & T. Co. (1936) 13 Cal.App.2d 482 (supporting link) applies the same measure-of-damages analysis.
Reviewed California court records with source links. Allegations are not findings.