5 Cited authorities

  1. Kirkeby v. Superior Court

    33 Cal.4th 642 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 147 times
    Holding that fraudulent transfer claim was a "real property claim"
  2. BGJ Associates, LLC v. Superior Court

    75 Cal.App.4th 952 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 116 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”
  3. 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
  4. 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.
  5. 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