Lectrodryer v. SeoulBank
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BOREN, P.J.
Lectrodryer sued SeoulBank for unjust enrichment arising from the bank’s issuance of a letter of credit. SeoulBank appeals following a jury verdict against it awarding $493,000. Lectrodryer cross-appeals, alleging demurrers were improperly sustained as to causes of action for fraud and intentional interference with contractual relations. We affirm.
Facts
Lectrodryer, a small Kentucky company, manufactured and delivered for JDP, a California exporter of industrial equipment, a molecular sieve dryer used in. refining oil into gasoline. Pursuant to a 1994 purchase order, the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Davey v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Philpott v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- First Nationwide Savings v. PerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Phillippe v. Shapell Industries, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1987
- Martin v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by138 opinions
- McBride v. BoughtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Peterson v. Cellco PartnershipCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Esg Capital Partners v. Venable LLPCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Prakashpalan v. Engstrom, Lipscomb & LackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- In re Porsche Cars North America, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2012
133 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.