Korbel

Korbel v. Sheung-Chi Chou

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 880·27 Cal. App. 4th 1427·33 Cal. Rptr. 2d 190·94 Daily Journal DAR 12504·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6666
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 30, 1994G014897California1,826 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sonenshine, J.

Sheung-Chi Chou and Vandorpe Chou Associates, Inc., appeal from the denial of a Code of Civil Procedure section 411.35 motion to compel Boris Korbel to disclose the identity of the expert upon whom he relied in filing his certificate of merit. We affirm because the parties’ settlement did not result in a favorable conclusion.

I.

Korbel brought suit against the seller of a house he had purchased, alleging building code violations. Chou and Vandorpe, consulting engineers, were added as defendants; Korbel maintained the engineering calculations used for the home’s construction bore Chou’s signature. The section 411.35 certificate of merit indicated the engineer whom Korbel consulted “concluded .. . there [was] reasonable and meritorious cause for commencing [the] action.” Chou, however, maintained he was not involved in the construction of the home and did not sign the calculations. Indeed, he suggested his signature had been forged.

A settlement was reached. Chou agreed to waive any fees and costs to which he might be entitled and the parties agreed to a dismissal of all claims. But, after the complaint was dismissed with prejudice, Chou, maintaining the litigation had…

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.