Legal Opinion
Helmer v. Bingham Toyota Isuzu
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 27, 2005No. F043471PublishedCited by 3 opinions
[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WISEMAN, J.—Plaintiff
PlaintiffKevin Helmer filed suit against defendants Bingham Toyota Isuzu and Bob Clark, his former employer and supervisor, for promissory fraud. He alleges that he was fraudulently induced to leave a prior job due to false promises made to him by Clark. A jury found in Helmer’s favor, awarding him $450,913 in compensatory damages and $1.5 million in punitive damages. Later, the court reduced the punitive damage award to $675,000.
Bingham appeals the judgment, arguing that 1) Helmer did not prove the elements of a cause of action for promissory fraud; 2) the award…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lazar v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- Toscano v. Greene MusicCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Lamke v. Sunstate Equipment Co., LLCDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2004
- City Solutions, Inc. v. Clear Channel Communications, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2003
3Cited by3 opinions
- Giusti v. Sterling Wentworth Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 2009
- Howard v. Tanium, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2023
- Plata v. Darbun Enterprises CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2014