White v. Cridlebaugh, No. F053843 - California Case Law
California Case Law - The FindLaw California Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal Opinion Summaries Blog

White v. Cridlebaugh, No. F053843

In an action for breach of contract, negligence, fraud, and violations of California's licensure requirements, trial court judgment is modified and affirmed where: 1) the court properly granted plaintiffs' motion for a directed verdict on their Business and Professions Code sec. 7031 claim for reimbursement of the compensation paid for the unlicensed work as the corporation that acted as the building contractor on the project violated California's licensure requirements; and 2) the reference in Business and Professions Code sec. 7031 to the recovery of all compensation paid an unlicensed contractor means the unlicensed contractor cannot reduce the recovery authorized by asserting claims of offset, indemnity, or contribution arising out of the unlicensed work. 

Read White v. Cridlebaugh, No. F053843 in PDF

Read White v. Cridlebaugh, No. F053843 in HTML

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Sidney P. Chapin, Judge.
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Filed July 29, 2009

Judges
Before: DAWSON, J., LEVY, Acting P.J., CORNELL, J.
Opinion by DAWSON, J.

Counsel
For Plaintiff: Ana M. Soares