Bermudo v. Tahmassebi CA2/8
Filed 10/7/13 Bermudo v. Tahmassebi CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION EIGHT
ISMAEL BERMUDO, JR., B240892
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. YC059960) v.
FARHAD TAHMASSEBI et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. William G. Willett, Judge. Affirmed.
John Schlanger, for Defendants and Appellants Farhad Tahmassebi and Euro American Auto Co., Inc.
Law Offices of Philip Landsman and Philip Landsman, for Plaintiff and Respondent Ismael Bermudo.
____________________________________
Ismael Bermudo filed suit against Farhad Tahmassebi and Euro American Auto Co., Inc. (Euro; collectively defendants) for damages arising out of Bermudo‟s purchase of an automobile. In brief, although defendants were obligated to pay off the balance of a loan used to finance Bermudo‟s trade-in vehicle, they did not pay off the loan. As a result, Bermudo was subject to collections efforts by the bank holding the loan, his credit score declined, and he was forced to file suit against the bank and defendants. Following a bench trial, the court entered judgment in Bermudo‟s favor and awarded him $31,760 in damages. On appeal, defendants argue insufficient evidence supported the court‟s liability findings on claims for fraud and unlawful business practices, and the damages award was not supported by substantial evidence. We affirm the trial court judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In February 2008, Bermudo decided to purchase a used Mercedes Benz SL500 (SL500) from Euro. He arranged with Euro to trade in his old vehicle, a Mercedes Benz 430CLK (430CLK). Bermudo had financed the purchase of 430CLK and still owed Capital One Bank $31,760 on the loan (Capital One loan). To facilitate the purchase of the SL500, Euro drew up a contract providing Bermudo would finance over $64,000. Euro told Bermudo that of the over $64,000 “purchase price,” $31,760 was to pay off the loan on the 430CLK. Bermudo agreed, understanding that he would no longer be responsible for the loan on the 430CLK. He gave Euro the keys to the 430CLK, and took the keys for the SL500. Tahmassebi was then President of Euro. He was involved in arranging the financing for Bermudo‟s transaction. Despite the arranged financing, and Euro‟s agreement to pay off the outstanding loan balance on the 430CLK, Euro did not pay off the Capital One loan. Euro paid approximately $8,000 on the loan balance. In June 2008, Capital One sent Bermudo a letter indicating he owed money on the 430CLK loan. Bermudo called Capital One to inform the bank he had traded in the car. Bermudo also called Euro and spoke to Tahmassebi. Tahmassebi said he would take care of the problem. In August 2008, Euro sent Capital One a check for the remaining loan balance, but the check was rejected due to insufficient funds. At some point, despite the outstanding loan balance, Capital One
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)