Kaljian v. Menezes
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
THAXTER, J.
Respondents Thomas E. Kaljian and Todd Merrill recovered judgment based on a jury’s special verdict against appellants Richard Menezes, Herman Menezes, John Menezes, and Triple M Cattle Company. The judgment was for $2,165,111, consisting of $2,090,375 in contract damages, $49,736 in fraud damages, and $25,000 in punitive damages. The action arose from Menezes’ termination of an alleged oral agreement for the development of certain real property owned by Menezes.
We will conclude that prejudicial error occurred when the trial court rejected Menezes’s request for jury…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Soule v. General Motors Corp.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Pool v. City of OaklandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
- Nelson v. AbrahamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Lemons v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- GAB Business Services, Inc. v. Lindsey & Newsom Claim Services, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2000
- Simmons v. WareCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- National Medical Transportation Network v. Deloitte & ToucheCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Lightsey v. MarshallNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1999
- People v. DawsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.