Tao v. Noval
Published: Aug. 1, 1998 | Result Date: May 8, 1998 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: BC011454 – $0
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Central West
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
Wayne J. Scott
(technical)
Facts
Cross-complainant Tao entered into a contract to purchase cross-defendant Noval's shopping center for $9.2 million. The contract contained a clause in the addendum allowing for a substantial adjustment in price based on the prior year's income. The cross-defendant did not read this provision. After the price reduction, the cross-complainant claimed the right to purchase the shopping center for $5.8 million. The cross-complainant's expert witness testified that at the time, the shopping center was worth $8 million. The cross-complainant brought this action against the cross-defendant based on breach of contract theories of recovery.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff made a settlement demand for $2 million. The defendant made no offer.
Damages
The cross-complainant claimed $4 million in damages.
Other Information
This case was tried in 1996, resulting in a jury verdict for the cross-defendant. On appeal, the verdict was reversed based upon the fact that the cross-defendant could not claim mistake when he failed to carefully read the contract. On retrial, the jury denied relief, finding that the contract was ambiguous, and that the cross-complainant was guilty of unclean hands with reference to the transaction.
Deliberation
five days
Poll
____ - ____ (Nos. Pls.)
Length
five days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390