Procedural Posture

Defendant lessor appealed from the judgment of the Superior Court of Sutter County (California), which found in favor of plaintiff leasing agent on plaintiff’s first cause of action for anticipatory breach of a written agency contract.

California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. can explain CACI 700

Overview

Plaintiff leasing agent and defendant lessor entered into a contract whereby plaintiff was to act as defendant’s agent in the negotiation and procurement of long-term leases of sites in its shopping center, and a long-term loan for the construction of the shopping center. Defendant committed an anticipatory breach by terminating the contract and refusing to pay commissions on three leases already obtained by plaintiff. Plaintiff filed a complaint for breach and later amended it to allege anticipatory breach. The trial court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss. On appeal, the court affirmed in part. The three-year post-remittitur provision of Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 583 was inapplicable as no remittitur was issued. Defendant had agreed to keep plaintiff’s time open to answer interrogatories, thus, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in not penalizing plaintiff for a delay in answering. The evidence sufficiently supported a finding of anticipatory breach and, thus, no prejudice resulted from the second complaint’s amendment asserting a claim for ordinary breach. The court reversed the damages judgment because it awarded interest in excess of the contract terms.

Outcome

The court affirmed in part the judgment in favor of plaintiff leasing agent because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting plaintiff to amend the complaint at trial, or in not penalizing plaintiff for its delay in answering interrogatories, and the evidence sufficiently supported a finding that defendant had anticipatorily breached the contract. The court reversed the damages judgment because it exceeded the contract terms.