Boyajian

Boyajian v. ORDOUBADI

Good Law
110 Cal. Rptr. 3d 469·184 Cal. App. 4th 1020·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 704
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 20, 2010G041311California3,885 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sills, J.

Because bankruptcy law allows for discharges of contingent claims, including claims against the debtor for indemnity before the time the indemnity claim against the debtor can be precisely measured, we affirm the trial court’s judgment precluding the assertion of a prepetition claim for equitable indemnity against the debtor, the respondent and successful defendant at trial, Shahrokh Ordoubadi. The trial court correctly determined that plaintiff’s claim for equitable indemnity was discharged in a bankruptcy proceeding in 1994.

I. THE HISTORY

Like many mystery stories, legal cases often trace their true origins to sins of the past whose effects are visited on the present. This case is a compilation of three separate wrong decisions, the net effect of which would mean that plaintiff Michael (sometimes “Mike”) Boyajian would have no claim for indemnity against the individual, Shahrokh Ordoubadi, who would turn out to be his coconspirator in a scheme to defraud a Dutch law firm.

A. Wrong Decision One: Trying to Defraud the Hague

Tribunal

1. Plan A: Letters of Credit

In November 1979, an angry mob of young Islamic revolutionaries backed by the Iranian government overran…

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.