Cal. Ct. App. 1st Dist. Div. 1 · Court of Appeal opinion · January 31, 2014
Related by Payoff Demands + Post-Closing Evidentiary Disputes · Payoff DemandsCourt record Court of Appeal opinion
Cathay Bank v. Fidelity National Title — California Court of Appeal
California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Two · B086723
AmountNot statedAmount not stated in reviewed source.
ResultCourt of Appeal opinionCourt ruling
HingePayoff DemandsShows why payoff-demand amounts, sub-escrow payment, close timing, and release/reconveyance records matter in title and escrow files.
SourceCourt opinionPublished opinion
File-record question
Shows why payoff-demand amounts, sub-escrow payment, close timing, and release/reconveyance records matter in title and escrow files.
Limit before takeaway
Published appellate opinion only. Payoff-demand and release-of-obligation row; no fault ranking or public risk conclusion is implied.
- Court / region
- Cal. Ct. App. 2d Dist. Div. 2
- Case number
- B086723
- Filed
- May 14, 1996
- Source record
- Court opinion
- Procedural posture
- Court of Appeal opinion
- Money movement stage
- Payoff stage
- Record gap
- Amount 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 a payoff demand sent through an escrow holder and sub-escrow, payment at close, and later release of a deed of trust.
What it hinged on
Payoff Demands. Shows why payoff-demand amounts, sub-escrow payment, close timing, and release/reconveyance records matter in title and escrow files.
Amount involved
Amount not stated in reviewed source.
Result
Court of Appeal opinion
Why this belongs here
Shows why payoff-demand amounts, sub-escrow payment, close timing, and release/reconveyance records matter in title and escrow files.
Documents to inspect
- Payoff demand
- Lender verification
- Good-through date
- Disbursement authorization
- Escrow instructions
- Record retention log
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:
Shows why payoff-demand amounts, sub-escrow payment, close timing, and release/reconveyance records matter in title and escrow files.
Timeline
FiledMay 14, 1996
Posture checked2026-05-31
Reviewed for Escrow Cases2026-05-31
Topics
Payoff Demands·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. Payoff-demand and release-of-obligation row; no fault ranking or public risk conclusion is implied.
Reviewed California court records with source links. Allegations are not findings.