Klug

Klug v. Dee CA2/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 16, 2022B302164California2,480 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lavin, J.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff and appellant Raymond A. Klug, M.D., a Corporation (Klug Corporation) appeals from a judgment following a jury trial on breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty claims. The defendants and respondents are Derek T. Dee, M.D., a Professional Corporation (Dee Corporation) and Edward Green III, a Medical Corporation (Green Corporation) (together, defendants). Klug Corporation’s appeal relates in part to an erroneous pretrial ruling by the trial court. Specifically, the court summarily adjudicated a portion1 of the breach of fiduciary duty cause of action in favor of Dee Corporation. This was error. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (f)(1).) But the court denied Green Corporation’s request for summary adjudication of the breach of fiduciary duty claim in its entirety. The breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract claims then proceeded to trial against defendants. Klug Corporation prevailed and recovered approximately $100,000 in damages and costs. Klug Corporation appeals, contending the court erred— substantively, not procedurally—to the extent it granted Dee Corporation’s motion for summary adjudication on the breach of fiduciary duty claim. 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.