Suh

Goodworth Holdings Inc. v. Suh

Good Law
239 F. Supp. 2d 947·2002 WL 31911009·2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26151
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 20, 2002C 01-03130 WHACalifornia10,290 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alsup, J.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff alleges that defendant Suh breached an oral joint-venture agreement by misappropriating the alleged venture’s opportunity while telling plaintiff that the opportunity had gone sour. ' On summary judgment, this order holds that although plaintiff and Dr. Suh conducted preliminary negotiations regarding a joint venture, they never created a binding contract. No reasonable jury could find otherwise. Plaintiffs fraud and state securities claims also must fail because plaintiff cannot prove an essential element. Accordingly, summary judgment is GRANTED for defendants as to all claims.

STATEMENT

At the heart of plaintiffs claims is the contention that plaintiff and defendant Suh formed an oral joint-venture agreement for the purpose of acquiring a majority share of the common stock issued by G & G Telecom, Inc (now called GNG Networks, Inc.), a Korean telecommunications corporation which was owned by Daehan Oil Pipeline Corporation (“DOPCO”). This order holds that although the parties engaged in preliminary negotiations, no agreement was ever reached…

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.