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.

Corporations
Fraud
Partnership

A.B.H. Investments Inc., Hassanali Dharani v. Narven Enterprises Inc., Behram Baxter

Published: Jun. 1, 2002 | Result Date: Mar. 13, 2002 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: GIC739587 Bench Decision –  $0

Judge

S. Charles Wickersham

Court

San Diego Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

James C. Mitchell
(Gilleon Law Firm APC)


Defendant

Anna F. Roppo

David R. Clark

Phillip C. Samouris
(Higgs, Fletcher & Mack LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

David W. White
(technical)

Jeffrey B. Isaacs
(technical)

H.L. "Bill" Lipman
(technical)

Defendant

Suzanne Mellen
(technical)

Robert A. Rauch
(technical)

Margaret M. Mann
(technical)

Robert H. Wallace
(technical)

Facts

The plaintiffs and the defendants formed a partnership to acquire and renovate the Comfort Inn Hotel located in
downtown San Diego. Financial difficulties caused the partnership to file Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1995. As
part of a court-approved reorganization plan, the hotel lenders significantly discounted their secured debt in
exchange for an infusion of new capital by the partners. The plaintiffs declined to contribute, so the defendants
contended that the plaintiffs had thereby lost their former partnership interests.
Several years later, the plaintiffs sued and contended that the defendants had essentially defrauded them of
their former partnership interests by allegedly misrepresenting the amount of new capital required, the source
of the defendantsÆ infusion of capital and the availability of money in another business venture between the
parties that the plaintiffs could have used for the Comfort Inn Hotel. The plaintiffsÆ suit was based on theories
of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The defendants ultimately obtained summary judgment on the basis that the bankruptcy
reorganization plan had extinguished the plaintiffsÆ claims and because any applicable statute of
limitations had run.

Damages

The plaintiffs claimed damages of $1.6 million as the value of their lost partnership interests, plus $700,000 lost income from the partnership and punitive damages.

Other Information

The summary judgment was entered approximately two years and three months after the case was filed. The plaintiffs have filed a motion to vacate the judgment on the grounds that the court granted a motion for reconsideration of an order denying summary judgment without jurisdiction. If the motion is denied, the plaintiffs will appeal.


#120948

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

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