- 22 -
10. This Second Amended Judgment supersedes and
replaces the Amended Judgment entered herein on August
14, 2002.
Approximately 2 months later, on April 18, 2003, the trial court
filed a document confirming a sale of the marina at auction to
Sunroad limited partnership at the highest bid of $25.5 million.
Bidders at the auction numbered three, and Sunroad limited
partnership’s high bid was the 14th bid after Sunroad limited
partnership had made an opening bid of $16.5 million.
Following this sale, Sunroad limited partnership declined to
transfer part of the sale proceeds to Collins as directed by the
court of appeal decree granting specific performance and the
trial court’s order of February 14, 2003. Collins moved the
trial court to compel compliance with the specific performance
decree. On August 29, 2003, by way of a 2-page order, the trial
court denied that motion. The order noted that Collins had
withdrawn the $389,662 from the trial court and that it had
stated in its initial decision, as amended, that this amount
equaled the amount that Collins would have received had it
granted his request for specific performance. The order
concluded that California law (specifically, Preluzsky v. Pac.
Co-operative Cafeteria Co., 232 P. 970 (Cal. 1925), which held
that a voluntary acceptance of the benefit of a judgment or order
is a bar to the prosecution of an appeal therefrom), estopped
Collins from prosecuting his appeal of the portion of the
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011