Henry

Henry v. CATS Communication CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 12, 2015G049520California4,942 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fybel, J.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Donald L. Henry filed a fourth amended complaint which contained claims for (1) relief under Corporations Code section 800 et seq. against CATS Communication, Inc. (CATS), Russ McCullough, and Mike Harrell; (2) breach of contract against CATS and McCullough; (3) fraud and misrepresentation (fraud) against McCullough, Jonathan Kudla, and Scott MacKay; and (4) breach of fiduciary duty against, inter alia, Harrell, Joseph Dawson, and Steve Rogala. Henry’s claims for relief under Corporations Code section 800 et seq. and breach of fiduciary duty were severed by the trial court from the claims for breach of contract and fraud. Following the close of Henry’s case-in-chief during a bench trial of Henry’s claims under the Corporations Code and breach of fiduciary duty, the court granted Harrell’s, Dawson’s, and Rogala’s motions for judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 631.8 as to the claims against them. Henry’s trial counsel asked if the court would issue a statement of decision. The trial court responded that it had issued a statement of decision by stating its reasons for granting the motions orally on the record; the court did not issue a written…

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.