California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 685 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

An interest in common is one owned by several persons, not in joint ownership or partnership.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1951–2017 · leading case: First Cmty. Bank v. Maureen Gaughan, 853 F.3d 508 (9th Cir. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

First Cmty. Bank v. Maureen Gaughan, 853 F.3d 508 (9th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “Under California law, the co-op would not constitute community property because it was not acquired by the Millers while they were domiciled in California.”

Effert v. Kalup, 723 P.2d 541 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). “Cal. Civ. Code § 685 . The Ulm court noted that Each installment of child support, when unpaid, becomes a separate judgment.”

In Re the Marriage of Ulm, 693 P.2d 181 (Wash. Ct. App. 1984). “Cal. Civ. Code § 685 provides a means of enforcement where there has been an excusable failure to seek satisfaction of the judgment within the 10-year period of limitation fixed by section 681.”

Slosberg v. Horn, 228 P.2d 99 (Cal. Ct. App. 1951). “Assuming for the purpose of this opinion only that the court was obliged *639 to believe his testimony and that decedent and citee intended to create a joint tenancy with right of survivorship, it does not follow that a tenancy in common was created by reason of the failure of a…”

Bakanauskas v. Urdan, 206 Cal. App. 3d 621 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988). “(Civ. Code, §§ 685, 686.) The grant deeds neither make any reference to nor incorporate any documents creating an exclusive right of occupancy.”

Jacquemart v. Jacquemart, 299 P.2d 281 (Cal. Ct. App. 1956). “” (Civ. Code, § 685.) It thus appears that the allegation that the property involved herein is owned “as community property” is not a sufficient allegation that plaintiff is a person, within the meaning of section 752 of the Code of Civil Procedure, who is entitled to maintain a…”

In re: Koko Sarkis Babian (9th Cir. BAP 2013). · cites it 4× “” Cal. Civ. Code § 685 (West 2007). 25 There is also a rebuttable presumption that property is not 26 13 27 Cal.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.