O'Brien v. Tchamanian
Mar 05, 2014OUTCOME: Prevailed on Motion for Judgment (CCP 631.8) at Trial
Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 055400 [Cross-Action]. This was a cross-action brought by a in pro per party (later represented by counsel for trial) for breaches of contracts (stock purchase ... and employment), quantum meruit, and fraud. Cross-complainant was seeking approximately $500,000.00 in damages. The cross-action was brought as retaliation for an underlying collection action in which the cross-complainant and his company were defending themselves in an action for approximately $65k in debt. The cross-complaint targeted certain individuals involved in the plaintiff corporation that was seeking to enforce the debt. The cross-complainant accused them of breach of alleged oral agreements to: i) buy cross-complainant's company and ii) employ him as an advisor during a one-year transition period of the sale. The cross-complainant also alleged that the breaches of contract occurred as a result of fraudulent misrepresentations made by the cross-defendants. I represented Cross-defendant Tchamanian in this matter. In our view, the cross-complainant's case always lacked merit and was simply the product of spite by the cross-complainant. but because the cross-complainant was a pro per party for most of the action, he was emotionally-invested in getting revenge and refused to withdraw the cross-complaint. The case went to a bench trial and, following cross-complainant's case-in-chief, we made a CCP 631.8 motion for judgment on the cross-complaint (the bench trial equivalent of a motion for directed verdict) which the judge granted in its entirety in favor of all cross-defendants.
