Plaintiff, a commercial bank, sued two individual defendants based upon their continuing guaranty of the debts and liabilities of a financially troubled business. Issues arose whether the bank owed a duty to disclose certain facts and defendants' claim of statutory exoneration.
Plaintiff, an industrial equipment rental company, has equipment damaged by subcontractor insured by defendant insurance companies. Question of whether plaintiff should prevail against subcontractor company but not as to defendant insurance companies on its suit based on a public works bond as to one and a contractor's license bond for the other company.
City/municipality sued defendant commercial business for unpaid rent. Issue was whether the City waived its right to full payment by accepting a reduction in rent from a sub-lessee.
Doctor filed a petition for administrative mandamus to compel an insurance provider to set aside its termination of the provider contract with him. Issues included whether the right of the doctor to practice in his field was a purely economic right or a fundamental right.
Plaintiff company remodeled a home for defendants. A dispute arose over the amount of payment. Plaintiff sued for breach of contract and foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien. Defendants filed a cross-complaint for unfair business practices, fraud, negligence, and breach of contract. Issue was whether plaintiff should prevail on a theory of unjust enrichment.
Plaintiff shopping center sued defendant general store for breach of contract after it closed its market in plaintiff's shopping center notwithstanding a “stay-open” clause in the lease. Issues were whether there was a breach of the lease, amount of damages, and duty to mitigate damages.
Defendants' daughter died when the motor home in which she was sleeping caught fire. The motor home had been parked in the driveway of the residence of its owners who had a standard homeowner’s insurance policy containing a motor vehicle exclusion. The insurance company filed a declaratory relief action to determine whether this exclusion precluded coverage under the policy for the owners' liability for the daughter's death.
Plaintiff corporation brought an action against its former employees for misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of confidentiality agreements and other related causes of action. Issue was whether attorney's fees were recoverable by defendants.
Plaintiff filed a fraud and breach of contract action against one California corporation, two out-of-state corporations and three non-resident individuals who were corporate officers of one of the out-of-state corporations. Question was whether the court had specific jurisdiction over the individuals as to the fraud cause of action.
Plaintiff brought a claim against defendant for breach of contract to supply materials for a project to widen a highway. Issues were whether plaintiff could base its claim on documents not specified in the complaint and whether there was evidence of a written contract between the parties.
Plaintiffs sued auto dealership arising out of a dispute over a lease contract between the parties. The lawsuit was based alleged violations of the Vehicle Leasing Act (VLA), the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), and the Song-Beverly Warranty Act (Song-Beverly). Issues concerned the evidentiary matters and attorney's fees.
Plaintiff attorney entered into a contingency fee agreement with defendant under which he agreed to act as defendant’s attorney in an action against a corporation. After the lawsuit settled, defendant refused to fully compensate attorney under the agreement. Attorney sued defendant for breach of the contingency fee agreement. After the fee agreement was voided for not fully complying with Business and Professions Code section 6147, the attorney sued for quantum meruit. Issue concerned the reasonable amount of attorney's fees owed.
Plaintiff corporation which markets bagged greens, suffered a significant loss of business in the wake of an FDA advisory. It sought to recover these losses under its insurance policy issued by defendant. After defendant denied the claim, plaintiff filed a breach of contract action against the insurance company. Issue concerned how to define "insured event" under the circumstances.
Plaintiff filed an action against defendant bank, and others in which she alleged improprieties in the non-judicial foreclosure process involving her residence. Issues concerned the causes of action for wrongful foreclosure, unlawful business practices, and declaratory relief.
Plaintiff, the owner of a historical home sued defendant film company for releasing a film about the home. Plaintiff alleged unauthorized use of its trademarks, unfair competition, and interference with contract, and economic advantage. Question was whether plaintiff's trademarks were an integral part of the public's vocabulary.
Plaintiff sold her medical practice to defendant. As part of this transaction, plaintiff lent defendant $75,000 and defendants A and B were guarantors on the note. After a dispute arose regarding the terms of the note, plaintiff sued A and B for breach of contract, declaratory relief, and reformation. Question whether the guarantors breached the guaranty agreement.
Plaintiffs sued their homeowner’s insurer and their insurance broker/agent for negligence, negligent misrepresentation, and conversion after their home and its contents were destroyed by fire. The insurance company paid the plaintiffs the full policy limits for the dwelling and also for the contents of the dwelling. Plaintiffs claimed that their broker had assured them that their policy would cover more than the actual stated policy limits.
Plaintiff material supply company sued a hotel for breach of contract. Issue concerned whether the court should allow the defendant to rely on unconscionability and unreasonableness defenses to the damages provisions of the contract when those defenses were not pleaded.
Plaintiff used the video-sharing service operated by defendant corporation. After the corporation suspended her account, plaintiff filed a complaint for breach of contract. Issues concerned whether plaintiff was entitled to either damages or specific performance.
Plaintiffs causes of action for specific performance, declaratory relief, and estoppel arose out of a lease-option agreement under which they leased a hotel from defendant for a five-year term and with an option to purchase the hotel if they paid a “non-refundable option consideration” to defendant by a date certain. They paid half of the option consideration and submitted a note for the other half which they never paid. Issue was whether the option consideration was satisfied.
Plaintiff paid a substantial deposit for commercial units in a proposed development. The units were never built and eventually plaintiff sued the developer and others for a return of his deposit . Issues regarding the statute of limitations and conditions on the developer's obligation to repay the deposit under the guarantee.