This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Contracts
Breach of Contract

Oceanus Trading Company, LLC v. HSK Consultants, LLC; David Bonivach; and Does 1 through 10 inclusive

Published: May 7, 2016 | Result Date: Apr. 8, 2016 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: MC024102 Verdict –  $350,000

Court

L.A. Superior Lancaster


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Racquel Flyer

David R. Flyer
(Flyer & Flyer APLC)


Defendant

Joshua P. Shelton
(Winston Wolfe PC)

Sean E. Macias
(Macias Counsel Inc.)


Experts

Defendant

James A. Black
(technical)

Facts

In 2012, plaintiff and defendant David Bunevacz, also known as Bonivach, and defendant's company HSK Consultants LLC, entered into a Supply Agreement in which plaintiff would become the exclusive marketing agent of electronic vaporizers imported from China.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant Bunevacz, going by the alias "Bonivach," befriended plaintiff in early 2012. Bunevacz provided financial documents and purchase orders showing a profitable business in importing electronic vaporizers from China for sale in the United States. Plaintiff, at Bunevacz's direction, wired $262,000 to the Chinese Manufacturer. Under the supply agreement, Bunevacz was responsible for bringing the product from China to California. Instead, Bunevacz came up with excuses that the products were stuck at the border and then that the batteries were all stale despite a one year product guarantee. The Supply Agreement included a personal guarantee by Bunevacz. Plaintiff wanted out of the deal after Bunevacz failed to deliver the products. The parties entered into a Global Release Agreement for Bunevacz to pay $350,000 to plaintiff to cover the $262,000 plus a reasonable return on investment. Bunevacz did not make any payments to plaintiff.

Plaintiff claimed that Bunevacz owed plaintiff $350,000 under the Global Release Agreement and failed to make any payments.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Bunevacz alleged that he did not sign the Global Release Agreement. Defendants also disputed the obligations under both agreements.

Result

The jury found Bunevacz breached the Global Release Agreement for $350,000, which also has a provision for attorney fees and prejudgment interest.

Other Information

The parties began in arbitration but the court ordered the parties out of arbitration when Bunevacz failed to pay arbitration fees. FILING DATE: Feb. 19, 2013.

Deliberation

one hour

Poll

12-0

Length

seven days


#104614

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390