Mac

Mac v. Minassian

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 18, 2022B309490California3,878 words

Opinion

Opinion

Harutunian, J.

background is taken chiefly from the plaintiffs’ trial testimony and exhibits.

3 never paid WGE for services rendered or operating costs and utilities under the terms of the Master Services Agreement.

II. First Three Complaints

In October 2017, plaintiffs filed suit against Minassian and Los Robles for breaching the Master Services Agreement and the May and June promissory notes. In February 2018, May 2018, and October 2018, plaintiffs filed their first, second, and third amended complaints, all with the same plaintiffs and defendants.

III. Fourth Amended Complaint and Stipulation

In March 2019, after the plaintiffs retained new counsel, plaintiff WGE filed a fourth amended complaint. The fourth amended complaint removed the individual plaintiffs and Minassian. Los Robles answered the fourth amended complaint on May 17, 2019. WGE filed the fourth amended complaint pursuant to a signed and filed stipulation between the parties. The trial court, however, never signed the stipulation. WGE stated that it “recently” realized that the court had not signed the stipulation. WGE’s Statement of the Case prepared for trial on May 31, 2019, referred to WGE as the sole plaintiff and to…

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.