legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Siry Investment v. Farkhondehpour
This case involves two consolidated appeals: one from a special verdict and judgment entered thereon, and one from the subsequent order approving the final accounting report prepared by the referee. Saeed Farkhondehpour (Farkhondehpour), individually and as trustee of the 1993 Farkhondehpour Family Trust, Morad Neman (Neman), individually and as trustee of both the Neman Family Revocable Trust and the Yedidia Investment Defined Benefit Plan, 416 South Wall Street, Inc., and 241 E. 5th St. Partnership, L.P. (defendants) argue that reversal is compelled because the special verdict and judgment in favor of Siry Investment, L.P. (Siry) are “fatally indefinite in imposing liability.” We agree. Siry’s arguments notwithstanding, the judgment and special verdict are hopelessly ambiguous because the jury made disjunctive findings—it found Farkhondehpour, either individually or in his capacity as trustee, liable, and it similarly found Neman, either individually or in his capacity as trustee, liable. Thus, the judgment is too uncertain to be enforced and must be reversed.
Moreover, because the trial court expressly relied upon the jury’s ambiguous findings in approving the referee’s final report, the order approving the final report must be reversed as well.
The matter is remanded to the trial court for a new trial.

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