lewis tesser
View Citing Opinions. CourtListener is a project of Free Law Projecta federally-recognized c 3 non-profit. We rely on donations for our financial security. Donate Now. Sign In Register. Filed: July 10th, Precedential Status: Precedential. Citations: Cal. Docket Number: B Gesser Robert M. In this action, plaintiff alleged that defendant, a coparticipant in a lewis tesser estate venture, breached the parties' lewis tesser lehmkuhl mueller fund the project, causing plaintiff to lose the deal.
Defendant filed a cross-complaint against plaintiff and plaintiff's companies, contending they had leiws obtained funds from him to pursue the deal. Plaintiff answered the cross-complaint. But plaintiff's companies, which had no assets, defaulted. The lewis tesser default judgment recited that plaintiff had personally committed acts of fraud in securing funds from defendant.
The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of defendant on the complaint based on the doctrine of judicial estoppel, which protects the integrity of the judicial process by preventing a party from taking inconsistent positions in separate cases.
Other Factors that Influence Gutter Replacement Costs
In a prior bankruptcy case, plaintiff did not list any legal claims as assets, an lewis tesser seemingly at odds with the filing of this action. We conclude that, in accordance with the principles of judicial estoppel, the summary judgment must be reversed because the bankruptcy court did not adopt or accept the truth of plaintiff's omission, eliminating any threat to judicial integrity.
On the cross-complaint, the trial court entered judgment against plaintiff based on the doctrine of collateral estoppel, which precludes a party from relitigating issues actually decided in a prior proceeding. The trial court reasoned that the default judgment entered against plaintiff's companies precluded him from litigating his individual liability because he was in privity with them. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment on the lewis tesser.
Please Sign In or Register
Kest later filed a cross-complaint against Gottlieb and others. RKG negotiated a separate agreement with a different property owner to purchase a four-acre parcel adjacent to the Quarry.
In JanuaryGottlieb had discussions with Kest to obtain funds to buy the Quarry. Kest indicated the Trust might be interested in providing the money.]
It is remarkable