legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Pladott v. Blankstein
Factually, this case concerns a house in Woodland Hills which originally belonged to plaintiff and appellant Alex Pladott and now belongs to his sister and brother-in-law, defendants and respondents Josef and Carmella Blankstein. Legally, the case concerns the part performance exception to the statute of frauds. The Blanksteins demurred, contending, inter alia, that any repurchase contract was invalid under the statue of frauds. Pladott's response relied largely on the theory that his part performance of the repurchase agreement made the contract enforceable. The court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend as to every cause of action but the cause of action for fraud. Pladott later dismissed that cause of action, and the trial court entered judgment for the Blanksteins. Court reverse the judgment, although we find that demurrer was properly sustained to two causes of action, for unjust enrichment and for promissory estoppel.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale