Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Citation
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Parent Document
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2023-10-03
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9430076/nash-v-aprea/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (31)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
- Nash v. Aprea (2023)
Full Text
413 chars7 Apria relies on language in a Senate Judiciary Committee report in connection with the 1992 amendments to section 685.040 that stated “the proposed amendment would ‘assure that contract provisions which provide for attorneys’ fee[s] are enforceable regardless of whether they are incurred in enforcing the judgment or in an appeal of the judgment.’” (Conservatorship of McQueen, supra, 59 Cal.4th at p. 610,