[REVIEW GRANTED] Mejia v. Reed (2002)

RHINA MEJIA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. DANILO REED, et al., Defendants and Respondents.

[Modification fn. * of opinion (97 Cal.App.4th 277) on denial of petition for rehearing.]

THE COURT. fn. † -

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on March 29, 2002, be modified as follows:

On page 38 on the first line [97 Cal. App. 4th 310, advance report, line 1] the parenthetical citation should be replaced with the following:

(See, Code Civ. Proc., §§ 704.115, subd. (b) [private pension plans generally exempt from judgment enforcement]; 703.070, subd. (a) [exemptions apply to child support judgments]. But see Code Civ. Proc., § 703.070, subd. (c), which authorizes trial court proceedings to "determine the extent to which the exempt property nevertheless shall be applied to the satisfaction of the judgment." Cf., Yaesu Electronics Corp. v. Tamura, supra, 28 Cal.App.4th at pp. 13-14 [judgment debtor's pension plan was not exempt from enforcement because it was not designed and used for retirement purposes].)

The petition for rehearing is denied.

There is no change in the judgment.

FN *. This modification requires the movement of text affecting pages 310-311 of the bound volume report.

FN †. Wunderlich, J., Bamattre-Manoukian, Acting P. J.