Douglas

Petitioner Peter J. Douglas filed suit against his former employer and others (real parties Jeffrey Charles Weiner et al., hereinafter Weiner) to recover commissions he alleges he earned by selling Weiner’s home improvement services. The first and second causes of action of Douglas’s second amended complaint plead Weiner obtained Douglas’s services by falsely promising Weiner would pay Douglas commissions when Weiner received signed service contracts from third parties. The second cause of action alleges the Weiner defendants conspired to defraud Douglas. Douglas’s third cause of action alleges Weiner’s conduct violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ( 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (c), hereinafter RICO) and the eighth cause of action is for a constructive trust based on the first three causes of action.

The trial court sustained Weiner’s demurrers to those four causes of action without leave to amend. Counsel’s California Rules of Court, rule 56(c) declaration explains the trial court’s thinking this way: “It was his honor’s contention that, because the false promise, alleged in [Douglas’s] Second Amended Complaint, had in fact been partially performed,…