Kurtin

Kurtin v. Elieff CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 2, 2015G049556California4,996 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Kurtin and Elieff were equal partners in a series of real estate ventures in the 1990’s. However, as Kurtin and Elieff structured their partnership, each real estate project operated as its own little company, referred to by the parties as the “Joint Entities.” In 2003, growing disagreements between the two led Kurtin to sue Elieff to “separate” their interests in the Joint Entities. That litigation spawned a mediation, which in turn produced a settlement agreement. That agreement, signed in August 2005, provided that Elieff was to buy out Kurtin for $48.8 million in four installment payments. The recitations at the beginning of the settlement agreement purport to treat Elieff and the Joint Entities as one collective party to the agreement: “This Settlement Agreement is entered into . . . between Todd Kurtin . . . and Bruce Elieff, the Elieff

2 Separate Entities identified in Exhibit ‘A’ and the Joint Projects identified in Exhibit ‘B’ on the other hand (collectively ‘Elieff’).” The settlement agreement provided that of the $48.8 million, both Elieff and the Joint Entities were jointly and severally responsible for the first installment of $21 million. However, only the…

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.