County of Alemeda v. Ace Recovery Services
Filed 3/30/06 County of Alemeda v. Ace Recovery Services CA1/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ACE RECOVERY SERVICES, INC., et al., Defendants; ACCESS RECOVERY GROUP, INC., Third Party Claimant and Appellant. | A109966 (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. 809675) |
Access Recovery Group, Inc. (Access) appeals from the denial of its claim to an interest in real property owned by David Davis. In essence, Access disputes the trial court's determination that a judgment lien held by the County of Alameda (County) is superior to a purported lien it claims to hold against the property. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
This is the most recent chapter in the County's attempt to enforce a substantial judgment against Ace Recovery Services, Inc. (Ace) and David Davis. On September 13, 2001, after a trial on claims including fraud, conversion and negligent misrepresentation, the trial court entered judgment against Ace and Davis for over $1.7 million.[1] The County recorded an abstract of judgment on January 15, 2002.
Access was incorporated on August 22, 2001, six days after the verdict.[2] On October 15, 2001--three weeks after the entry of judgment--Davis executed a â€
