Rael

Rael v. Davis

Good Law
166 Cal. App. 4th 1608·83 Cal. Rptr. 3d 745
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 2008B197971, B200217California5,434 words

Opinion

Opinion

Maneela, J.

INTRODUCTION

In consolidated appeals, plaintiff/appellant Cruz Cardenas Rael contends the trial court erred in excluding as inadmissible a document prepared in the course of a mediation, and finding the purported agreement unenforceable as not signed by all parties. She contends that promises made by one of the parties to the agreement were severable and separately enforceable. In his appeal, defendant/respondent/appellant David M. Davis contends that the trial court erred in refusing to award attorney fees pursuant to Civil Code section 1717.

We conclude that the trial court did not err in excluding the agreement and finding it unenforceable. We thus affirm the judgment. We also affirm the trial court’s denial of attorney fees, as no statutory exception to mediation confidentiality permits application of Civil Code section 1717.

BACKGROUND

1. The Pleadings

In 2005, Cruz Cardenas Rael commenced this action for breach of contract against Davis as the executor of the estate of her deceased husband, Tony G. Rael, Jr., and as the successor trustee of the Rael Family 1993 Inter Vivos Trust. The complaint alleged that Tony G. Rael, Jr., died in 2003, and that prior to his…

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.