Yoo

Hye Young Yoo v. Sue Jho

Good Law
147 Cal. App. 4th 1249·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 245·2007 Daily Journal DAR 2544·55 Cal. Rptr. 3d 243·2007 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1961
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 23, 2007B189586California2,491 words

Opinion

Opinion

Klein, J.

Defendant and appellant Sue Jho (hereafter, seller) appeals a judgment awarding $103,250 in damages to plaintiff and respondent Hye Young Yoo (hereafter, buyer) following a court trial.

The trial court, in an attempt to do equity, awarded partial rescission to the plaintiff. The essential issue presented is whether, due to the illegal object of the contract, i.e., the sale of a business dealing in counterfeit goods, the trial court erred in entertaining the action and in awarding any relief.

We conclude the illegal object of the contract precludes any recovery. Further, notwithstanding the failure of either party to raise the issue below, the trial court should have raised the issue of illegality on its own motion in order to dispose of the matter. “ ‘ “No principle of law is better settled than that a party to an illegal contract cannot come into a court of law and ask to have his illegal objects carried out...." ' "(Wong v. Tenneco, Inc. (1985) 39 Cal.3d 126, 135 [ 216 Cal.Rptr. 412 , 702 P.2d 570 ].) In a case like the one before us, the law will leave the parties as it finds them. Therefore, the judgment is reversed with directions.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL…

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.