Apex Development v. Armand Gonzales, Inc. CA2/5

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff, Apex Development, Inc., appeals from two judgments dismissing its malicious prosecution complaint. Plaintiff sued Armand Gonzales, Inc. doing business as Gonzales Construction and Armand Gonzales (Armand Gonzales, Inc.). Plaintiff also sued Armand Gonzales, Inc.’s lawyers: Sedgwick, LLP; two lawyers employed by Sedgwick, LLP (Jonathon J. Dunn and Andrew C. Harris); Murchison & Cumming, LLP and three lawyers employed by Murchison & Cumming, LLP (Dan L. Longo, Jean A. Dalmore and Nanette G. Reed). The judgments were entered after the trial court sustained defendants’ demurrers without leave to amend. The trial court ruled plaintiff failed to state a cause of action for malicious prosecution because the prior action did not terminate in its favor. Plaintiff argues the underlying action terminated favorably. Plaintiff argues the prior lawsuit was terminated based on the parol evidence rule. We consider the judgment in the underlying action as a whole and conclude the prior lawsuit was terminated in material part on the statute of limitations ground. The judgments in the present case are affirmed.

II. BACKGROUND

A. Underlying Action

On October 30, 2009,…