Legal Opinion

Miske v. Coxeter

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 12, 2012No. A127596; Nos. A127761, A128167PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

REARDON, Acting P. J.

—In this fraud in the inducement action against the general partners of a limited partnership, a jury found in favor of respondent George J. Miske, as assignee of a limited partner’s fraud claim, and the court entered judgment for $1,408,212.07, including compound prejudgment interest. Following the denial of posttrial motions, the court awarded Miske substantial attorney fees, based on the attorney fee provision in the underlying limited partnership agreement (LPA). Now appellant1 Coxeter challenges the judgment against him because the jury found that he did not…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Lucido v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Xuereb v. Marcus & Millichap, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1992
  3. Stout v. TurneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Blickman Turkus v. Mf Downtown SunnyvaleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  5. Lerner v. WardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Maynard v. BTI Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2013
  2. Brown v. HudsonUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California · 2021
  3. Cammarata v. Kelly Capital, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2020
  4. Drink Tank Ventures LLC v. Real Soda in Real Bottles, Ltd.California Court of Appeal · 2021
  5. Drink Tank Ventures v. Real Soda in Real BottlesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API