Plaintiff copartners filed a verified complaint for breach of a written contract and an affidavit for an attachment. The writ was issued and levied. Defendant business owner filed a motion to discharge the attachment on the ground that the attachment was improper under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 537, 538. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California) granted the motion and the copartners appealed.
California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. can tell you more about CACI defamation
The parties entered into a written contract by the terms of which the copartners agreed to install and maintain for eight years a coin-operated automatic phonograph machine in business owner's cafe. The business owner agreed to pay the copartners 50 per cent of all moneys deposited in the machine. The business owner violated the terms of the contract by disconnecting the machine, moving it to a place on the premises where the patrons would not have used it, and installing a similar machine owned by another party. The contract was not secured. The court found that (1) a party was entitled to invoke the remedy of attachment under § 537 with respect to unsecured contracts for the direct payment of money in the state; (2) direct has been defined as meaning an amount ascertainable with reasonable certainty; and (3) it appeared by reference to the contract, the complaint, and the affidavit that the computation of damages alleged was reasonable, definite, and readily ascertainable. Thus, the copartners were entitled to invoke the remedy of attachment under § 535 and the trial court erred in discharging the attachment.
The judgment of the trial court was reversed.CACI defamation, Procedural Posture