Korens v. R. W. Zukin Corp., 212 Cal. App. 3d 1054 (1989)

Citation: Korens v. R. W. Zukin Corp., 212 Cal. App. 3d 1054 (1989)
Parent Document: Korens v. R. W. Zukin Corp., 212 Cal. App. 3d 1054 (1989)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1989-08-02
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2167019/korens-v-r-w-zukin-corp/ ↗

Full Text

1,319 chars

The evidence before the triál court on the issue of an alleged implied contract to pay interest consisted of the written contract, which does not provide for the payment of such interest; and Korens’s deposition testimony, in which she admitted that there was never any discussion of whether the security deposit would earn interest. While an implied-in-fact contract or conceivably an explicit oral contract requiring Zukin to pay interest could arise in certain circumstances, such as from statements by Zukin’s agents, Korens’s concessions that the subject was never discussed, and the absence of any other evidence, rendered summary judgment proper. Further, there was no evidence of circumstances under which an implied contract right or implied covenant or fiduciary duty or misrepresentation concerning the payment of interest could have arisen. Therefore, summary judgment was also proper on Korens’s claims that Zukin committed a “[t]ortious [b]reach of [c]ontract” or breached an implied covenant in the lease, or committed “fraud.” Finally, no issue requiring trial was raised by Korens’s claim for an “accounting” of interest allegedly payable on her deposit under the terms of an “oral declaration of trust,” for the reasons that there was no evidence such a trust existed and no such interest was payable.

Other Sections in This Document (52)

Full Text