Cal. Ct. App. 4th Dist. Div. 3 · Court of Appeal opinion · August 12, 1983
Related by Seller Proceeds + Post-Closing Evidentiary Disputes · Seller ProceedsPacific Firestone Escrow v. Food Giant Markets — California Court of Appeal
California Court of Appeal · 202 Cal.App.2d 155
Teaches creditor-priority and interpleader handling for escrowed liquor-license sale proceeds.
Published appellate opinion only. Stakeholder and creditor-priority row; no company conduct conclusion.
- Court / region
- Cal. Ct. App.
- Case number
- 202 Cal.App.2d 155
- Filed
- January 1, 1962
- 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 reviewed escrowed proceeds from a liquor-license sale, creditor claims, and distribution priority under Business and Professions Code section 24074.
What it hinged on
Amount involved
Amount not stated in reviewed source.
Result
Court of Appeal opinion
Why this belongs here
Teaches creditor-priority and interpleader handling for escrowed liquor-license sale proceeds.
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:
Timeline
Topics
Seller Proceeds·Post-Closing Evidentiary Disputes
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. Stakeholder and creditor-priority row; no company conduct conclusion.