Tabaz

Tabaz v. Cal Fed Finance

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 837·27 Cal. App. 4th 789·33 Cal. Rptr. 2d 134·94 Daily Journal DAR 11398·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6287
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 16, 1994B072676California1,423 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

Parties enter into an agreement for the sale and purchase of a note. After the sale, the purchaser sues the seller for breach of contract, fraud, conspiracy and restitution. Seller prevails on all causes of action relating to the sale of the note. The trial court, however, finds that a payment due on the note was wrongfully received by seller after the close of escrow. The trial court therefore awards purchaser a judgment for that single payment.

May seller thereafter sue purchaser for malicious prosecution? Yes, because seller prevailed on causes of action that were severable from those on which purchaser prevailed. The rights relating to the sale of the note are different than those relating to payments due under the note.

Plaintiff Cyrus Tabaz brought a malicious prosecution action against Cal Fed Finance and its attorneys (collectively Cal Fed). Cal Fed successfully demurred on the ground Tabaz failed to plead a favorable termination of the underlying suit. We reverse.

Facts

Cyrus Tabaz owned a travel business. He sold the business to Brown Record Distributors, Inc. Tabaz received a note in the amount of $455,000, the makers of which were Brown, Harold McDowell…

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.