Sleeth v. Sleeth
Dec 09, 2010OUTCOME: reversed on appeal, selected for publication
Successful appeal of attorney fee award in guardianship case.
Lawyer
OUTCOME: reversed on appeal, selected for publication
Successful appeal of attorney fee award in guardianship case.
OUTCOME: defense verdict
A real estate salesman sued over the terms a verbal commission agreement. He added claims for intentional interference and added the president and broker of Mohave, along with the principal of a compa ... ny that owned land sold through Mohave. The additional claims and defendants were dismissed on summary judgment, or by stipulation. Four day jury trial. Unanimous verdict for defense, following a 20 minute final deliberation.
OUTCOME: Appeal summarily dismissed
Plaintiff appealed a defense verdict I obtained.
OUTCOME: Defense verdict
Rippetoe recorded a lis pendens and sued Gordon to quiet title and for money expended on the purchase of land. Gordon counterclaimed for wrongful lien. Rippetoe's husband anf Gordon lived together ... in Arizona since the late 80s. In 1998, Gordon bought property. Mr. Rippetoe assisted, in exchange for boarding his dogs and other joint enterprises between the two. Unfortunately, the story he told his wife, who lived in California, was different. She got mad, and decided she deserved the property and the money used to buy it, claiming it was hers. Rippetoe claimed there was a contract between sellers and her to buy the property, and a contract between Gordon and her to transfer title and repay the money. Most of the case was disposed of on summary judgment. The only issue for trial was whether Rippeote's money was used within the statute of limitations period Before trial, Rippetoe agreed to release the lis pendens if sale proceeds went into escrow. Literally the day before trial (or possibly two days before), Rippetoe raised a California law argument At trial, Rippetoe failed to prove that her money was used. Gordon prevailed, was awarded the money in escrow and her attorney fees and costs. Rippetoe appealed, claiming that the judge misapplied California law, and disputing his factual findings.