Plaintiff girlfriend challenged the order of the Superior Court, Los Angeles County (California), which granted summary judgment in favor of defendant boyfriend based on the statute of limitations. Plaintiff filed suit for breach of contract, breach of an implied in law contract, and fraud 10 years after their relationship ended.
California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. shares CACI Verdict Forms
Overview
Plaintiff girlfriend filed suit against defendant boyfriend for breach of contract, breach of an implied in law contract, and fraud after defendant breached an alleged oral agreement to cohabit, help each other in business ventures, and jointly accumulate, share, and account for property and income. The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment because plaintiff’s claims, which were filed 10 years after they separated, were barred by the statute of limitations. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 339(1), 338(4). The court affirmed the order that granted summary judgment and held that plaintiff’s claims accrued at the time of the separation. The court found that promises made by defendant did not create a triable issue of fact or revive the oral promise so as to have eliminated the bar of the statute of limitations. The court held that the promises were gratuitous and lacked the consideration to be binding. The court found that there was no conflict in the evidence regarding the defense of the statute of limitations. The court monetarily sanctioned plaintiff’s counsel for pursuing a frivolous appeal.
Outcome
The court affirmed the judgment that granted defendant boyfriend summary judgment in plaintiff girlfriend’s suit for breach of contract, breach of an implied in law contract, and fraud which was commenced 10 years after the relationship ended. Plaintiff’s claims accrued at the time of the separation and were barred by the statute of limitations. The court monetarily sanctioned plaintiff’s attorney for pursuing a frivolous appeal.