Facts

The matter was originally filed as an action sounding in breach of an oral partnership agreement regarding the ownership of three Santa Ana businesses (a market, a tortilleria and a liquor store). The parties then signed a document on Jan. 7, 2008, which provided in part that "Jose Eulogio Bonilla [would] own 20%" of the businesses. The defendants immediately contested the viability of that document. Plaintiff then added a cause of action for breach of the written settlement agreement. That is the only cause of action that was tried to the Court.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that defendants repudiated the settlement agreement within two days of its execution and then failed to comply with its terms.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants contended the Court should have admitted parol evidence. The Court declined, stating the agreement was fully integrated based on the test of reviewing the four corners of the document. The Court ruled that all of defendants' affirmative defenses at issue lacked merit as a matter of law. Defendants contended that a 2008 ruling by a prior judge denying plaintiff's motion to enforce settlement under CCP 664.6 precluded plaintiff from litigating a breach of contract claim regarding the same settlement agreement.

Result

In addition to the monetary award, plaintiff received an adjudication that he is a 20 percent owner of the three businesses (a market, a tortilleria and a liquor store).

Other Information

Plaintiff states he will be filing a motion seeking approximately $1 million in contractual attorney fees. Defendants intend to appeal.