Kirkeby v. Superior Court
33 Cal.4th 642 (Cal. 2004) Cited 148 times
Holding that fraudulent transfer claim was a "real property claim"
BGJ Associates, LLC v. Superior Court
75 Cal.App.4th 952 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999) Cited 117 times 1 Legal Analyses
Stating that “an action for money only, even if it relates in some way to specific real property, will not support a lis pendens”
Castro v. Superior Court
116 Cal.App.4th 1010 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) Cited 61 times 2 Legal Analyses
Applying a pragmatic approach to determine prevailing party status under California Code of Civil Procedure section 405.38, relying on courts adopting the same approach under California Code of Civil Procedure sections 1942.4, 1354, 3344
Campbell v. Superior Court
132 Cal.App.4th 904 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005) Cited 58 times
In Campbell, this court considering a petition for writ of mandate held that the real party in interest in that case, who had successfully moved to expunge a lis pendens in the trial court but was denied attorney fees and costs, could not raise any issue as to the court's attorney fees and costs order where she did not seek review of its decision on that question.
Urez Corp. v. Superior Court
190 Cal.App.3d 1141 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987) Cited 63 times
Holding that constructive trust and equitable lien claims may not support a lis pendens