Legal Opinion
Ponderosa Center Partners v. McClellan/Cruz/Gaylord & Associates
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 22, 1996No. B095494PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
VEGAN, J.
McClellan/Cruz/Gaylord & Associates (MCG), an architectural firm, appeals from an order denying a motion for sanctions brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 411.35, subdivision (h). The trial court found that respondent, Ponderosa Center Partners, complied with section 411.35, the certificate of merit statute, when it consulted a structural engineer before filing suit against MCG for professional negligence. We affirm.
Facts
On April 27, 1992, a roof and canopy collapsed at the Ponderosa Shopping Center in Camarillo. Shortly after the collapse, respondent hired a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In Re Marriage of FlahertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Guinn v. DotsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Lehmann v. DalisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Barondon Corp. v. NakawataseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
3Cited by5 opinions
- Jackson v. DoeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- UDC-Universal Development, L.P v. CH2M HillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Heydar v. Westport InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- AA MECHANICAL v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
- AA MECHANICAL v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997