Gordon v. Roth CA2/4
Steven Gordon and Jonathan Roth entered into a Memorandum of Understanding concerning the formation of a joint venture to identify and manage real estate investments and other business opportunities. After Roth located a real estate opportunity, however, he informed Gordon that it would not be part of the joint venture. Gordon and his business associate and partner, Robert Ormond, then commenced this action based on contract and tort theories. On Roth’s demurrer to their first amended complaint, the trial court determined the MOU was unenforceable because its terms were too uncertain and it constituted only an “agreement to agree.” The court therefore entered judgment in favor of Roth. This appeal followed. We agree Gordon and Osmond (“Appellants”) failed to state any claims and affirm the judgment.
Comments on Gordon v. Roth CA2/4