Rifkin

Rifkin v. Achermann

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 203·43 Cal. App. 4th 391·50 Cal. Rptr. 2d 661·96 Daily Journal DAR 2794·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1668
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 8, 1996A069418California3,010 words

Opinion

Opinion

Swager, J.

This extended litigation reaches us for a second time on appeal. We remand the case for two minor modifications in the judgment—a recalculation of interest and the deletion of one item of costs—and otherwise affirm the judgment.

I. Facts and Procedural History

The dispute arises from a standard real estate sales agreement in which Marcel and Adelheid Achermann (hereafter the Achermanns) agreed to sell their former residence in Marin County to Harvey Rifkin (hereafter Rifkin) at a closing set for June 15, 1988. A week after the scheduled closing, on June 22, 1988, Rifkin filed a complaint for specific performance and damages against the Achermanns. Finding the Achermanns to be in breach of the contract to sell the property, the trial court awarded Rifkin a judgment for $115,000 in general damages, $10,000 in punitive damages, plus costs and attorney fees. On appeal, we affirmed the judgment for Rifkin but held that the trial court erred in calculating general damages and awarding punitive damages. In an opinion entered December 29, 1992, we remanded the case “for a new trial on the issue of damages.” We allowed Rifkin, however, to renew a demand for specific performance…

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.