Trial court judgment in favor of plaintiff for damages, interest, and costs related to defendant’s theft of property is affirmed where a criminal restitution order under Penal Code sec. 1202.4 in favor of a victim of a crime does not preclude the victim or the victim’s assignee from pursuing a separate civil action for restitution based on the same facts from which the criminal conviction arose.
Read Vigilant Ins. Co. v. Chiu, No. B209550 in PDF
Read Vigilant Ins. Co. v. Chiu, No. B209550 in HTML
Appellate InformationAPPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, R. Bruce Minto, Judge. Affirmed.SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREEFiled June 29, 2009
JudgesBefore CROSKEY, J., KLEIN, P.J., ALDRICH, J.Opinion by CROSKEY, J.
CounselFor Plaintiff: Anderson, McPharlin & Conners, David T. DiBiase and Joseph P. Tabrisky.For Defendant: Megan A. Richmond.
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
