Kappel

Kappel v. Bartlett

Good Law
1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 419·200 Cal. App. 3d 1457·246 Cal. Rptr. 815
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 6, 1988B025210California4,289 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hanson, J.

By second amended complaint, plaintiff Karl G. Kappel (plaintiff and/or Kappel) sought both compensatory and punitive damages from defendants Brian Thomas Fecher (Fecher), David Aulden Bartlett (Bartlett), doing business as Attorney Services Systems, a fictitious name (Attorney Services); Attorney Services Systems, Inc., a California corporation, and Does. Plaintiff alleged three causes of action, i.e., (1) perjury; (2) negligent infliction of emotional distress; and (3) negligence.

The trial court sustained the defendants’ demurrers to the second amended complaint without leave to amend. Judgment of dismissal was entered on October 16, 1986; notice of entry of judgment was filed and served October 22, 1986. Plaintiff filed a timely notice of appeal, on December 19, 1986. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2(a).)

Following oral argument, the opinion of this court was filed on February 26, 1988. Plaintiff’s petition for a rehearing was granted on March 24, 1988. The matter was resubmitted following reargument on April 27, 1988.

Standard of Review

The standard of review applicable when appeal is taken from a judgment after demurrers have been sustained without leave to…

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.