Doug Jacobs v. April Herpin
Published: Nov. 8, 1997 | Result Date: Aug. 8, 1997 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 254242 – $1,223,240
Judge
Court
Riverside Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Facts
Plaintiff owned a building where a Red Onion Restaurant previously operated. The Red Onion closed in mid-1993. Subsequently, defendants, one of whom was a former manager of the Red Onion, entered into a 15-year lease with the plaintiff to operate the restaurant. The initial rent was $17,500 per month. Additionally, the defendants purchased the restaurant equipment remaining on the premises from the plaintiff for $240,000. They paid $50,000 down and signed a promissory note for $190,000. The defendants opened their restaurant in December 1993. The agreements entered into by the parties contained "cross-collateralization" provisions. In the event that the defendants breached the commercial lease, then they were deemed in default of the promissory note and if they breached the terms of the promissory note, they were deemed in breach of the real estate lease. Various disputes arose between the parties regarding the interpretation of the payment terms on the promissory note. Ultimately, the defendants stopped paying on the promissory note and the plaintiff declared a default under the commercial lease. An unlawful detainer action was filed and heard in the Riverside Municipal Court in August 1994. At that time, the defendants were given the option to bring current the promissory note payments upon payment of $26,000 to cure the default under the lease. The defendants chose not to make the payment and vacated the premises on Aug. 31, 1994. The plaintiff re-let the premises to another tenant for $12,300 per month, a sum of $5,200 per month less than what the defendants agreed to pay. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants based on a breach of contract theory of recovery. Defendants filed a cross-complaint for breach of contract, fraud and slander.
Settlement Discussions
No demands or offers were made.
Other Information
The verdict was reached approximately three years after the case was filed. An arbitration was held on June 30, 1995 before Victor Urso, Esq., resulting in an award of $811,341.70. The defendants requested a trial de novo. The court granted plaintiff's motion in limine to exclude all evidence that contradicted the written lease and promissory note, and to preclude defendants from submitting any evidence to the jury that plaintiff lost the subject property due to foreclosure prior to the trial. Defendants voluntarily dismissed the cause of action for fraud and slander and the court granted a nonsuit on the breach of contract cause of action. The jury, by special verdict, found that defendants unjustifiably breached the promissory note agreement and unjustifiably breached the real estate lease agreement. The jury further found that the plaintiff acted reasonably in his attempts to mitigate his damages.
Deliberation
three hours
Poll
12-0
Length
four days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390