Legal Opinion

Marracino v. Brandstetter

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 23, 1993No. A056699PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WERDEGAR, J.

On appeal from an adverse judgment entered after a trial de novo, defendant Zachary Brandstetter contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to enter judgment on a judicial arbitration award. We disagree. Accordingly, we shall affirm.

Background

Plaintiffs William G. and Vivian D. Marracino sued defendant for breach of contract, fraud and other causes of action arising from a $34,000 loan they had made him. The matter was ordered to judicial arbitration. On November 6, 1989, the arbitrator issued an award for plaintiffs in the amount of $53,112.96 plus costs.

On…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Herbert Hawkins Realtors, Inc. v. MilheiserCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  2. Hebert v. HarnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
  3. Healy v. OnstottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Calderon v. KaneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  2. Miller v. Foremost Motors, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1993
  3. Carlisle v. PetroskyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API