Finley v. Third Laguna Hills Mutual

WARREN T. FINLEY, as Trustee, etc., et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. THIRD LAGUNA HILLS MUTUAL et al., Defendants and Respondents.
WARREN T. FINLEY, as Trustee, etc.,et al., Petitioners, v. SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, Respondent; THIRD LAGUNA HILLS MUTUAL et al., Real Parties in Interest. No. E024743 (Super.Ct.No. 760598) California Court of Appeal Fourth Appellate District Division Two Filed June 22, 2000 CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION
ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]
        The petition for rehearing is denied. The opinion filed in this matter on May 23, 2000 is modified as follows:

        1.        On page 131, in the first paragraph of section IV.B.1, beginning "In 1978," the ellipsis after "bylaws" and before the comma is deleted and replaced by the following: "and to compliance with other provisions of this division and any other applicable laws".

        2.        On page 182, in the second full paragraph on the page, beginning, "Plaintiffs also point out," the last two sentences, beginning with "There is no evidence," are deleted and replaced with the following: "There is no conclusive evidence, however, that any of the contributions were made out of 'reserve funds' within the meaning of the Act. Plaintiffs point to indications in the record that some (though by no means all) of the contributions were made from funds designated '[u]nappropriated [e]xpenditure reserve.' The very label 'unappropriated expenditure reserve' seems inconsistent with the Act's concept of 'reserves' as funds identified for use to repair, replace, or maintain major components. (See Civ. Code, §§ 1365, subd. (a)(2)(B), 1365.5, subd. (f)(1).) Certainly we cannot say there was no triable issue of fact with respect to whether the contributions violated the Act in this respect."

        Except for this modification, the opinion remains unchanged. This modification does not effect a change in the judgment.


1        See Daily appellate Report of May 25, 2000, page 5441, column 2, line 12, from the bottom.

2        See Daily appellate Report of May 25, 2000, page 5442, column 2, last 2 sentences, last full paragraph.



Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rules 976(b) and 976.1, this opinion is certified for publication with the exception of parts III, IV, and VII.