Baron

Baron v. Mare

Good Law
120 Cal. Rptr. 675·47 Cal. App. 3d 304
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 17, 1975Civ. 44021California2,338 words

Opinion

Opinion

Beach, J.

Nature of Case:

Appellant Rasco Mare (sued as Rascomare) appeals from a summary judgment granted in favor of respondent and against appellant in an action brought on a written contract for attorneys’ fees. Ray Sarlot, one of the named defendants in the action, is not a party to this appeal.

Background:

Appellant employed respondent, an attorney, to represent it with reference to a zoning matter being considered by the City of Los Angeles. The written agreement is on a letterhead form of respondent and in part pertinent hereto reads as follows:

This was the wording of the contract on February 5, 1973. However, on February 27 during a hearing of this matter, respondent changed the wording on the form by striking the designation “RD1.5” and inserting therein “RD2” and defendant Sarlot on behalf of appellant initialled the change. After the hearing the property was zoned RD2 and thereupon respondent billed appellant for the $6,500. Appellant did not pay and respondent sued. Respondent’s complaint alleged the execution of the written contract between respondent and appellant, and the nonpayment of the $6,500. The answer of respondent did not deny the execution of the…

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.