Ram Pizza v. Super. CT. CA4/2

California Court of Appeal Mar 13, 2014 No. E060399Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the breach of contract claim should proceed to trial because evidence that the defendant informed the plaintiff the proposed transferee would not be approved could excuse the plaintiff's failure to formally request transfer approval.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in granting summary adjudication on the breach of contract claim.

Disposition. Granted in part and denied in part.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“petitioners’ assertion that real parties’ representative clearly informed petitioners that the proposed transferee would not be approved could, on a persuasive and detailed evidentiary showing, be found to excuse petitioners’ failure to perform”

Filed 3/12/14 Ram Pizza v. Super. CT. CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

RAM PIZZA, INC., et al.,

Petitioners, E060399

v. (Super.Ct.No. RIC 1100608)

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF OPINION RIVERSIDE COUNTY,

Respondent;

DOMINOS PIZZA, et al.,

Real Parties in Interest.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for writ of mandate. Richard J.

Oberholzer, Judge. (Retired Judge of the Kern Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice

pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Granted in part and denied in part.

Reid & Hellyer, Michael G. Kerbs and David G. Moore for Petitioners.

No appearance for Respondent.

Kolar & Associates, Elizabeth L. Kolar and Michelle A. Burr for Real Parties in

Interest.

In this matter we have reviewed the petition and the response filed by real parties

in interest. We have determined that resolution of the matter involves the application of

settled principles of law, and that issuance of a peremptory writ in the first instance is

Ram Pizza v. Super. CT. CA4/2

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF OPINION RIVERSIDE COUNTY,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

MILLER J.

AI Brief