Fitch

Fitch v. Pacific Fidelity Life Insurance

Good Law
126 Cal. Rptr. 445·1975 Cal. App. LEXIS 1655·54 Cal. App. 3d 140
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 30, 1975Civ. 46392California2,549 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cobey, J.

Stanley Fitch’ appeals from a judgment for respondents Pacific. Fidelity Life Insurance Company (hereinafter called “Pacific”) and Manny Silberman following a trial to the court. The appeal lies. (Code Civ. Proc., § 904.1, subd. (a).)

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in enforcing an agreement (hereinafter sometimes called “termination assignment agreement”) between himself and both respondents assigning to Silberman commissions on insurance policies which accrued following the termination by respondents of his position as an insurance salesman for them. The total of such commissions whose assignment is contested herein is $9,720.83.

Appellant contends that the termination assignment agreement is unenforceable because (a) respondents furnished no consideration for it; (b) there was mutual uncertainty as to the operation of the assignment at the time the agreement was made; (c) a material term of the agreement was unilaterally altered by respondents after its execution; and (d) the agreement failed to conform to the requirements of Labor Code section 300.

We conclude from an examination of these contentions that they are without merit. Therefore we will…

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.