Segal

Segal v. Silberstein

Good Law
156 Cal. App. 4th 627·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1786·67 Cal. Rptr. 3d 426
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 29, 2007B191303California3,323 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rubin, J.

Defendants David, Sandra, Michael, and Lisa Silberstein appeal from the trial court order denying their petition to compel arbitration of claims raised in Richard Segal’s complaint alleging breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the parties’ real estate acquisition and development joint venture. Because the operating agreements of the parties’ business entities require arbitration, we reverse.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Richard Segal sued David Silberstein, alleging that Silberstein breached their oral joint venture agreement to split the profits from their business. The complaint alleged that pursuant to the joint venture agreement, Segal and Silberstein formed several business entities to buy, develop, and manage real property, including Chapman Summit (Chapman), Double S Development (Double S), BSG Financial (BSG), Sage Village, and Adventure Development. Segal alleged that Silberstein and several companies that were Silberstein’s alter ego tried to hide, divert, fraudulently transfer, and otherwise take control of the assets and profits “of the aforementioned entities.”

The complaint’s first cause of action was by Segal against…

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.