Dumas v. Nishida
Plaintiff and appellant Jose Dumas agreed to sell a piece of agricultural property to defendant and respondent Gary Nishida. As part of the transaction, Nishida signed a note in favor of Dumas for $600,000, secured, in part, by a deed of trust on Nishida’s home. When Nishida defaulted on the note, Dumas foreclosed on the deed of trust, obtaining Nishida’s home with a credit bid. Dumas also brought suit against Nishida for the deficiency, as well as an additional amount which, allegedly, should have been paid to Dumas by the escrow holder for the original transaction, but was not. The trial court granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of Nishida without leave to amend Dumas’s breach of contract cause of action, and denied Dumas’s subsequent written motion for leave to amend the complaint to allege a cause of action for unjust enrichment. The trial court also imposed sanctions against Dumas’s counsel, Attorney John Clark Brown, Jr., for bringing a frivolous motion for leave to amend the complaint. Dumas appeals the judgment and Attorney Brown appeals the award of sanctions. We affirm the judgment, reverse the sanctions order, and remand for further proceedings on the motion for sanctions.
Comments on Dumas v. Nishida