Cravea

INTRODUCTION

The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment of defendants and respondents F. Bari Nejadpour and Nejadpour & Associates (Nejadpour defendants) and then entered judgment in their favor and against plaintiff and appellant Gerald Cravea. We affirm. This action arises from the alleged legal malpractice and fraud of Benjamin Donel and the Law Offices of Benjamin Donel (Donel defendants), who represented plaintiff in a number of matters. Plaintiff contends that the Nejadpour defendants were “partners” of the Donel defendants and, as such, were vicariously liable for the Donel defendants’ alleged negligent and fraudulent conduct. The main issue on appeal is whether there was a triable issue of material fact concerning the alleged actual or ostensible partnership between Donel and Nejadpour, or their two respective law firms. We shall conclude that the trial court correctly found that, as a matter of law, there was no partnership.

FACTUTAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. Donel’s Representation of Plaintiff From approximately January 2005 to February 2007, the Donel defendants provided legal services to plaintiff. They represented plaintiff in a variety…