Fox

Fox v. Dehn

Good Law
116 Cal. Rptr. 786·1974 Cal. App. LEXIS 1214·42 Cal. App. 3d 165
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 1974Civ. 42442California3,059 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stephens, J.

Appellants Louis Fox and Harold Fox seek reversal of the superior court’s order granting respondents’ motion for summary judgment. Appellants’ action sought damages for breach of contract by decedent, William Dehn. In their pleadings before the superior court, respondents successfully contended that the action (filed moré than five months after rejection of appellants’ claim by the executrix of decedent’s estate) was barred by the statute of limitations. The superior court granted summary judgment on the “statutory ground that the action has no merit and that no triable issue of fact is presented.”

Facts

On appeal, the parties are in substantial agreement as to the following: In October 1969, appellants (who were licensed real estate salesmen) entered into an oral employment agreement with decedent, who was then doing business as a sole proprietor under the name of William Dehn and Associates. Under the terms of the agreement, appellants were to serve as “tract directors” with respect to the sale of real property known as Rancho Tehama Reserve, the sale being supervised by decedent. Their duties included setting up a sales office, handling and supervising all setting-up…

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.