Legal Opinion

Rael v. Davis

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 24, 2008No. B197971, B200217PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MANEELA, J.

INTRODUCTION

In consolidated appeals, plaintiff/appellant Cruz Cardenas Rael contends the trial court erred in excluding as inadmissible a document prepared in the course of a mediation, and finding the purported agreement unenforceable as not signed by all parties. She contends that promises made by one of the parties to the agreement were severable and separately enforceable. In his appeal, defendant/respondent/appellant David M. Davis contends that the trial court erred in refusing to award attorney fees pursuant to Civil Code section 1717.

We conclude that the trial court…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Parsons v. Bristol Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Foreman & Clark Corp. v. FallonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Santisas v. GoodinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  4. Burden v. SnowdenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Levy v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Adhav v. Midway Rent A Car, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  2. Adhav v. Midway Rent A Car, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2019
  3. Anastasi v. KnowlesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  4. Bio-Tek Technology v. Queen's Dialysis Unit CA2/4California Court of Appeal · 2014
  5. Davis v. Rael CA2/2California Court of Appeal · 2014

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

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

Powered by the Exa API