Legal Opinion

BEHNIWAL v. Mix

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 30, 2005No. G034074PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SILLS, P. J.

This is a statute of frauds case with attendant fallout involving attorney fees. It involves two appeals: one by the disappointed would-be buyers of an Irvine condo, Mandeep and Amandeep Behniwal, asserting that the trial court should have granted them specific performance; the other by the seller’s agent and her realty company challenging attorney fees assessed against them at the conclusion of the litigation. Ironically, the fee award is in favor of the losers in their quest for specific performance, the Behniwals.

Both appeals will result in reversals of the relevant…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Cassim v. Allstate InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Gray v. Don Miller & Associates, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Rakestraw v. RodriguesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  4. WYDA Associates v. MernerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
  5. Wilk v. VencillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Mega RV Corporation v. HWH CorporationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
  2. Won Shil Park v. First American Title Co.California Court of Appeal · 2011
  3. Apex Directional Drilling, LLC v. SHN Consulting Engineers & Geologists, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
  4. BEHNIWAL v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  5. AA v. TorresDistrict Court, D. Guam · 2024

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API