Vanacore & Associates, Inc. v. Rosenfeld

A contract for a fee for alerting an owner to escheatable property is void as against public policy if entered into between the time a holder reports escheated property to the state and the date the holder transfers that property to the state.  Under CCP 1582, a contract providing for a 10% finder’s fee to a firm that alerted defendant to the escheat of his property to the State of California was contrary to public policy and void because it was entered into between the date that the holder of the escheatable property reported the property to the state and the date (seven months later) when the holder was required to transfer the property to the state.

California Court of Appeal, Third District (Renner, J.); March 10, 2016 (published April 11, 2016); 2016 WL 922068

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s