Park

Park v. Guisti

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 20, 2025G063372California2,488 words

Opinion

Opinion

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Park filed a complaint asserting one cause of action for breach of contract against Guisti, alleging he hired Guisti in December 2018 to file a petition for writ of habeas corpus in state court, as well as federal court if necessary. (Guisti was not Park’s counsel of record in the underlying criminal case.) Park alleged Guisti never filed a petition on his behalf in either court. The written contract attached to the complaint indicated Park had agreed to pay Guisti a total of $35,000 for his services. Notice of a case management conference was mailed to Park at Corcoran. Park filed a request for telephonic appearance at the case management conference, indicating he was incarcerated outside Orange

2 County and was disabled. He also filed a case management statement and a request to waive court fees; both filings stated he was incarcerated. 1 On the date of the case management conference, Park did not appear. The court set the matter for a jury trial on December 5, 2022. Guisti filed his answer to the complaint on the same day as the case management conference.

1Park has requested judicial notice of the case management statement which was…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.