Wood v. McNelis CA2/3

California Court of Appeal Jan 15, 2026 No. B343295Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged the partial performance exception to the statute of frauds, thereby precluding dismissal of the complaint at the demurrer stage.

Issues

Whether an oral contract with a four-year term is barred by the statute of frauds.
Whether the plaintiff sufficiently alleged the partial performance exception to the statute of frauds.
Whether the plaintiff sufficiently pled a cause of action for an accounting.

Disposition. reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We conclude that plaintiff has sufficiently alleged facts supporting the partial performance exception to the statute of frauds.”

“This alleged conduct satisfies the evidentiary function of the statute of frauds by confirming that a bargain was in fact reached.”

“At the pleading stage, this allegation is sufficient to show that enforcing the statute of frauds would result in an unjust or unconscionable loss amounting, in effect, to fraud.”

Filed 1/15/26 Wood v. McNelis CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE JOHN WOOD, B343295

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 23GDCV02307) v.

MARK G. MCNELIS et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Ashfaq G. Chowdhury, Judge. Reversed and remanded. David A. Cordier for Plaintiff and Appellant. Law Offices of James W. Bates and James W. Bates for Defendants and Respondents.

‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗

Plaintiff John Wood appeals from a judgment of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained a demurrer brought by defendants Mark G. McNelis and Mark G. McNelis & Associates, CPAs Inc. Plaintiff argues that the trial court erred in sustaining the demurrer because the statute of frauds does not bar his breach of contract and related causes of action. We conclude that plaintiff has sufficiently alleged facts supporting the partial performance exception to the statute of frauds. Accordingly, we reverse. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In October 2023, plaintiff filed this lawsuit, alleging that he was the assignee of Donald R. Wood’s estate and that defendants breached an oral contract with the estate by failing to pay the estate a portion of fees collected from clients transferred from the estate to defendants. Operative Complaint. After multiple demurrers, plaintiff filed the operative second amended complaint (SAC) in May 2024, alleging causes of action for (1) breach of contract, (2) common counts, and (3) an accounting.1 The SAC, which was a form complaint, had the following allegations common to all claims: “13. Plaintiff is the assignee of all rights, title and inter[est] in and to any claims held by the Estate of Donald R. Wood (‘Wood Estate’) against Defendants arising out of an oral agreement between the Wood Estate and Defendants entered on or about May 20, 2020 whereby the Wood Estate would transfer

1 The SAC also alleged “unfair competition/business practices.” This cause of action is not at issue on appeal, so we do not discuss it further.

Wood v. McNelis CA2/3

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

EDMON, P. J.

EGERTON, J.

ADAMS, J.

AI Brief