Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Citation
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Parent Document
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 1985-03-15
Other Sections in This Document (18)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
- Little v. Sanchez, 166 Cal. App. 3d 501 (1985)
Full Text
710 charsRespondent’s suggestion that the court’s ruling may be upheld because appellants, the named members of the class, are “strangers” to the judgments entered as to respondent’s other tenants, fails to grasp the nature of a class proceeding. Similarly inapposite is his argument that the amount of money he sought in all these actions, taken collectively, may have exceeded the court’s jurisdiction. The object of appellants’ class action was not the recovery of monetary damages, or monies in any sum; it sought merely to preclude the possibility that writs of execution might issue upon judgments that were void, at least to the extent they had been “stayed” contingent upon the payment of future “installments.”