Cricket Communications v. Superior Court CA6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 27, 2024H051568California3,899 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wilson, J.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Initial lawsuit and coram vobis petition The underlying facts that preceded the coram vobis writ are set forth in Chaganti. For context, we briefly restate them here before summarizing the events that followed remand. In 2015, Chaganti filed a civil action against Cricket and New Cingular (defendants) for breach of contract, fraud, and negligence, relating to a commercial lease on property in Missouri. The case was assigned to Judge Theodore Zayner. In April 2018, defendants moved for summary adjudication. Judge Zayner granted the motion as to two of Chaganti’s causes of action on statute of limitations grounds, leaving only two

2 causes of action asserted solely against Cricket. (Chaganti, supra, 73 Cal.App.5th at p. 240.) The remaining causes proceeded to a jury trial before Judge JoAnne McCracken in September 2018. The jury returned a special verdict in favor of Cricket, and in December 2018, the court entered judgment. Following entry of judgment, Chaganti unsuccessfully moved for a new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict. On March 8, 2019, Chaganti filed a notice of appeal from the judgment. (Chaganti, supra, 73 Cal.App.5th…

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.