DRG/Beverly Hills, Ltd. v. Chopstix Dim Sum Cafe and Takeout III, Ltd.

Bad Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1159·30 Cal. App. 4th 54·35 Cal. Rptr. 2d 515·94 Daily Journal DAR 16193·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8768
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 16, 1994B065620California1,916 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stoever, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendant after jury verdict.

On or about March 17, 1989, appellant DRG/Beverly Hills, Ltd. (hereinafter DRG), as lessor, and respondent Chopstix Dim Sum Cafe & Takeout III, Ltd., through its general partner, Chopstix III, Inc. (hereinafter collectively Chopstix), as lessee, entered into a written lease agreement for premises to be occupied by lessee’s restaurant/bar business.

Respondents Epsteen, Milham and Benun (hereinafter Guarantors) each individually guaranteed Chopstix’s performance under the aforementioned lease agreement.

Said lease agreement contained certain contingencies:

The required licenses, permits and approvals were not obtained by either party on or before the September 23, 1989, termination date. The wine and beer license was never obtained.

The lease agreement contained a provision specifically requiring all amendments or modifications to be in writing.

DRG contends that Chopstix verbally and by its conduct waived the aforementioned contingencies. With respect to the verbal waiver, DRG relies primarily upon the hearsay testimony of a DRG representative relating a June 27,1989, meeting with…

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.