White

White v. Moriarty

Good Law
15 Cal. App. 4th 1290·19 Cal. Rptr. 2d 200·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 525·93 Daily Journal DAR 6140·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3599
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 14, 1993A055618California3,059 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dossee, J.

Michael James Moriarty appeals from a judgment against him on a promissory note, arguing that the judgment is not supported by substantial evidence. Plaintiff Peter K. White, as trustee for his wife and Mr. and Mrs. John Fall, cross-appeals, arguing statute of limitations issues. We determine that the trial court applied the wrong statute of limitations and remand for recalculation of the amount due. In all other respects, we affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

In 1983 Moriarty, a California attorney, purchased $10,000 worth of stock in Nisus Video, Inc. Charles Anderson, Moriarty’s brother-in-law, was secretary of Nisus. Anderson explained to Moriarty that Nisus had a patent on a commercial video lens that would revolutionize the video market.

In 1985 Anderson asked Moriarty to sign a power of attorney to facilitate Anderson’s financing and purchase of a video camera for the corporation. The power of attorney was drafted by Anderson, a New Mexico attorney, and was signed by Moriarty. The document gave Anderson the power to “execute all documents, do all acts, receive or pay all sums of money, and negotiate all matters in conjunction with the purchase of an…

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.