Mehraby

Mehraby v. Minassi CA2/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 27, 2016B258300California3,492 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendants, Juliet and Vahan Sean Minassi, appeal from an order denying their new trial motion. This lawsuit was brought by plaintiffs, Rooben and Karita Mehraby, after an unsuccessful attempt to purchase a home. Ms. Minassi executed a short sale purchase agreement for a home then owned by her. The trial court ordered specific performance of the purchase agreement. Defendants then filed a new trial motion which was denied. We conclude all of plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the cancellation agreement dated December 13, 2010. We reverse the judgment in plaintiffs’ favor. Upon remittitur issuance, judgment is to be entered in defendants’ favor.

II. BACKGROUND

A. Factual Background Prior to the Complaint’s Filing

On April 29, 2010, plaintiffs and Ms. Minassi signed a purchase agreement for a home located at 3117 Emerald Isle Drive in Glendale, California (the property). Plaintiffs agreed to purchase the property from Ms. Minassi for $650,000. Plaintiffs deposited $19,500 as an initial deposit with Glen Oaks Escrow. The purchase agreement included a short sale addendum. The short sale addendum provided, “This [purchase] Agreement is contingent upon Seller’s receipt…

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.