Legal Opinion

Guthman v. Moss

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 5, 1984No. Civ. 68956PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

THOMPSON, J.

In this case we are called upon to determine whether a clause in which a buyer of residential real property agrees to pay liquidated damages is unenforceable as a matter of law when the clause is not separately signed or initialed by buyer and seller pursuant to California Civil Code 1 section 1677.

While the Legislature has not provided any express guidelines for the enforceability of a clause which fails to meet the formal requirements in that section, we hold that the Legislature did not intend such clauses to be rendered unenforceable as a matter of law. We further hold…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Clean Air Constituency v. California State Air Resources BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Better Food Markets, Inc. v. American District Telegraph Co.California Supreme Court · 1953
  3. People Ex Rel. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development Commission v. Town of EmeryvilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Chavez v. SargentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Tracy v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Allen v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  2. Castro v. Sacramento County Fire Protection DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
  3. Little v. CFS Service Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1987
  4. Fergus v. SongerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  5. In Re DirecTV Early Cancellation LitigationDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2010

13 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