Gidding
Gidding v. Salama CA1/2
Opinion
Opinion
Filed 6/10/14 Gidding v. Salama CA1/
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
JOHN GIDDING et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants,
A136071
v. JOSEPH SALAMA et al., (San Francisco City and County Super. Ct. No. CGC-11-507519) Defendants and Respondents.
John Gidding, on behalf of himself and his company, Midshore Marketing, LP (Midshore) (collectively plaintiffs), appeals after the trial court granted the motion for reconsideration and enforcement of the parties’ settlement agreement brought by defendants Joseph Salama, John Schilt, and Tenax Law Group PC (Tenax) (collectively defendants), in this legal malpractice action. Gidding contends (1) because the settlement agreement was ambiguous as to the need for the signatures of defendants’ counsel, it…