Harris

Harris v. Rudin, Richman & Appel

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 761·74 Cal. App. 4th 299·87 Cal. Rptr. 2d 822·99 Daily Journal DAR 8507·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6731
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 18, 1999No. B125227California3,109 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Johnson, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Dennis A. Harris (Harris) appeals from the judgment of dismissal after the trial court sustained, without leave to amend, defendants’ demurrer to Harris’s complaint for breach of written contract and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Harris’s appeal challenges both the trial court’s denial of his motion to enforce a settlement agreement under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, and the order sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend. We affirm the court’s denial of Harris’s motion to enforce the settlement agreement pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 on the ground the requirements of that section were not satisfied. We also affirm the portion of the judgment sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend as to both causes of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress but reverse the judgment with respect to the cause of action for breach of contract.

Facts and Proceedings Below

Harris retained the law firm of Rudin, Richman & Appel (RR&A) to draft an irrevocable trust for him. Harris later filed a malpractice claim against RR&A, Milton Rudin, Fredric Richman, Martin Appel, Raymond Kaplan and Jeffrey…

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.