Kramer

Kramer v. Puracyp CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 18, 2015D065400California8,115 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mcdonald, J.

Filed 3/18/15 Kramer v. Puracyp CA4/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

KYLE KRAMER, D065400

Plaintiff and Appellant,

v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2011-00058121-CU-BC-NC) PURACYP, INC., et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Jacqueline

M. Stern, Judge. Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded with directions.

Gaston & Gaston and Matthew J. Faust for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Kaloogian & Fuselier, Lowell Robert Fuselier and David J. Hart for Defendants

and Respondents.

Plaintiff Kyle Kramer appeals a judgment following a nonjury trial of his breach

of contract action against defendants Puracyp, Inc. (Company), Mark Dale…

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.