proiblog.blogg.se

Procedural Posture
Plaintiff sought review of an order of the Municipal Court for the Los Cerritos Judicial District of Los Angeles County (California) granting summary judgment to defendants in plaintiff's action against defendants for damages for the breach of an oral sales agreement.

Overview
Plaintiff's assignor entered into an oral agreement with defendants for the sale of gasoline. Plaintiff sued defendants for breach of the agreement. The trial court granted summary judgment to defendants, ruling that plaintiff's claim was barred by the two year statute of limitations, found in Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 339(1), governing oral contracts. Criminal DNA Evidence Work has played a bigger and bigger role in many nations' criminal justice systems. The court reversed the order of the trial court. Applying the four year limitations period found in Cal. Com. Code § 2725, which applied to all sales contracts, the court ruled that plaintiff's action was timely. In determining that § 2725 applied to plaintiff's complaint, the court observed that § 2725 was enacted for the specific purpose of burning uniformity to the treatment of sales agreements, oral and written.

Outcome
The court reversed the order of the trial court granting summary judgment to defendants because plaintiff's breach of contract action was timely filed under the limitations period governing sales agreements.