Mooney

Mooney v. Caspari

Good Law
138 Cal. App. 4th 704·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 527·2006 Daily Journal DAR 4419·41 Cal. Rptr. 3d 728·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3113
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 13, 2006A108618California6,952 words

Opinion

Opinion

Swager, J.

Following a jury trial and verdict, a judgment was entered in the amount of $1.5 million in favor of respondent in his legal malpractice action against appellants. We conclude that respondent’s action is barred by a prior judgment in a malpractice action against a party in privity with respondent, and reverse the judgment.

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The current action—one of several that has resulted from an ill-fated joint venture agreement to develop 12.32 acres of commercial property—had its genesis 25 years ago, when respondent’s father, Mike Mooney, a licensed commercial real estate broker doing business as Mike Mooney Associates, entered into a listing agreement with Specialty Restaurants Corporation (Specialty), which owned the property located near the western entrance to the San Mateo/Hayward Bridge on State Route 92 in Foster City (the property). Pursuant to the listing agreement, Mike Mooney was given the exclusive right to sell or lease the property for a stated commission of 7 percent. He died before the property was sold or leased. His son, respondent, also a licensed real estate broker, acquired the listing rights to the “Specialty…

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.