What is an account stated?

“An account stated is an agreement, based on the prior transactions between the parties, that the items of the account are true and that the balance struck is due and owing from one party to another. When the account is assented to, ‘“it becomes a new contract. An action on it is not founded upon the original items, but upon the balance agreed to by the parties....” Inquiry may not be had into those matters at all. It is upon the new contract by and under which the parties have adjusted their differences and reached an agreement.’” (Gleason v. Klamer (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 782, 786–787 (citations omitted).)

“An account stated need not cover all the dealings or claims between the parties. There may be a partial settlement and account stated as to some of the transactions.” (Gleason, supra, 103 Cal.App.3d at p. 790, (citation omitted).)

“The essential elements of an account stated are:

  1. previous transactions between the parties establishing the relationship of debtor and creditor;
  2. an agreement between the parties, express or implied, on the amount due from the debtor to the creditor;
  3. a promise by the debtor, express or implied, to pay the amount due.”

(Zinn v. Fred R. Bright Co. (1969) 271 Cal.App.2d 597, 600.)

How to Structure the Motion

“The agreement of the parties necessary to establish an account stated need not be express and frequently is implied from the circumstances. In the usual situation, it comes about by the creditor rendering a statement of the account to the debtor.” (Zinn v. Fred R. Bright Co. (1969) 271 Cal.App.2d 597, 600.)

“If the debtor fails to object to the statement within a reasonable time, the law implies his agreement that the account is correct as rendered.” (Fred R. Bright Co. (1969) 271 Cal.App.2d 597, 600.)

Response

“The account stated may be attacked only by proof of ‘fraud, duress, mistake, or other grounds cognizable in equity for the avoidance of an instrument.’ The defendant ‘will not be heard to answer when action is brought upon the account stated that the claim or demand was unjust, or invalid.’” (Gleason v. Klamer (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 782, 786–787.)

Useful Resources for Account Stated

Recent Rulings on Account Stated

201-225 of 2066 results

OXFORD INTERNATIONAL, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS VANOUNOU CLOTHING, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

(“Plaintiff”) filed this action for breach of contract, open account, account stated, goods sold and delivered, conversion, claim and delivery, bad check, and promise without intent to perform against Defendants Vanounou Clothing, Inc. (“Vanounou Clothing”), New Clothing, LLC, Moshe Vanounou (“Moshe”), and Zion Vanounou (“Zion”) (collectively, “Defendants”). Defendants Vanounou Clothing, Moshe, and Zion were personally served with the Summons and Complaint on February 28, 2020. (3/25/20 Proofs of Service.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 28, 2020

PAWNEE LEASING, A CORPORATION VS ROBERT DOUGLAS SPIRO, JR.

The complaint, filed January 29, 2020, alleges causes of action for: (1) breach of written agreement; (2) open book account; (3) reasonable value; (4) account stated; (5) indebtedness; (6) unjust enrichment; (7) breach of personal guaranty; (8) claim and delivery; and (9) conversion. B.

  • Hearing

    Sep 25, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE VS. UBALDO LEYVA

Grant Plaintiff's request for judgment on the pleadings on its Complaint against Defendant Ubadlo Levya, on the grounds that (i) Plaintiff's Complaint states, inter alia, a common count for account stated against Defendant Levya; and (ii) Defendant Levya's Answer – particularly when viewed in light of Defendant Levya's deemed admissions – does not state any viable defense to this common count. Enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant Levya in the principal amount of $2,101.19.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

INLAND BUILDERS VS CENTRO MEDICO

As a result, the FAC fails to allege facts sufficient to state a cause of action for account stated. Uncertainty: The only cause of action that is uncertain is the 5th cause of action for account stated. This cause of action requires an allegation that a new agreement to pay a balance due was formed. As discussed above, this allegation is missing. As a result, this cause of action is also uncertain.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

WEST COVINA CAR STOP, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS ROUND TABLE REMARKETING D.R.S., INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

On January 14, 2020, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Round Table, Ward and Does 1-50 for: Breach of Contract Account Stated Alter Ego Conversion On March 6, 2020, Round Table’s and Ward’s defaults were entered. A Case Management Conference is set for June 8, 2020. Discussion Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. The following defects are noted: It is unclear how Ward would be personally liable.

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

AMERICAN EXPRESS NATIONAL BANK VS EDWARD GARRICK

BACKGROUND: On June 5, 2019, Plaintiff American Express National Bank commenced this action against Defendant Edward Garrick for (1) common counts: book account, account stated; and (2) quantum meruit – reasonable value, seeking $26,933.35 in damages.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

SOLEIMANI & ASSOCIATES, APLC VS FARIBA DJAHANBANI

The operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) states three causes of action for breach of contract; open book account; and account stated. The FAC alleges that Defendant retained Plaintiff to represent the interest of Defendant in a family law matter on December 6, 2011. As of March 2019, Defendant owes $114,089.76 to Plaintiff based on legal services rendered. On March 13, 2020, Djahanbani filed a cross-complaint against S&A.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

WORKERS MOUNTAIN VALLEY ASSEMBLY LLC VS CITY OF SAN FERNANDO

Poltavski filed a Cross-Complaint on July 19, 2018, alleging three causes of action: Account Stated Breach of Oral Contract Declaratory Relief On June 20, 2019, this Court granted Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash Business Records Subpoena to Circle of Hope Alliance. On January 9, 2020, this Court granted Poltavski’s Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Cross-Complaint.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

NORTH MILL EQUIPMENT FINANCE LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AND SERVICING AGENT FOR NORTH MILL CREDIT TRUST FKA EFS CREDIT VS UBDT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Breach of Written Agreement; Breach of Personal Guaranty; Breach of Written Agreement; Breach of Personal Guaranty; Account Stated; Open Book; and Unjust Enrichment. On May 18, 2020 default was entered as to Defendants UBDT, Inc. and Gerardo Contreras (hereinafter “Defendants”). On May 19, 2020, Does 1 to 10 were dismissed without prejudice.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

AVITUS INC. VS ANDIAMO MANAGEMENT COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ET AL.

On March 11, 2019, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Defendants and Does 1-10 for: Breach of Written Promissory Note Open Book Account Account Stated Breach of Personal Guarantee On June 10, 2019, Plaintiff filed a proof of service, which reflected that Andiamo had been personally served with the summons and complaint on May 30, 2019. On July 9, 2019, Andiamo’s default was entered; on that date, Plaintiff dismissed Tunzi without prejudice.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

NORTH MILL EQUIPMENT FINANCE LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AND SERVICING AGENT FOR NORTH MILL CREDIT TRUST FKA EFS CREDIT VS UBDT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Breach of Written Agreement; Breach of Personal Guaranty; Breach of Written Agreement; Breach of Personal Guaranty; Account Stated; Open Book; and Unjust Enrichment. On May 18, 2020 default was entered as to Defendants UBDT, Inc. and Gerardo Contreras (hereinafter “Defendants”). On May 19, 2020, Does 1 to 10 were dismissed without prejudice.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

DISCOVER BANK VS RANDALL STEVENS

SERVICE: [X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK [X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK [X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK OPPOSITION: Filed on June 22, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None REPLY: None filed as of September 15, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None ANALYSIS: Background & Discussion On June 17, 2019, Plaintiff Discovery Bank (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for open book account and account stated against Defendant Randall Stevens (“Defendant”).

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

JIM CORTINEZ DOING BUSINESS AS JC CONSTRCUTION VS ZK BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

The Second Amended Complaint asserts causes of action for: 1) Breach of Contract; 2) Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; 3) Quantum Meruit and Quantum Valebant; 4) Foreclosure of Mechanic’s Lien; and 5) Account Stated. On August 11, 2020, the court granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to file a Third Amended Complaint.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LAW OFFICE OF NEIL M. SUNKIN, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION VS UNIVERSITY PLAZA, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

Account Stated University argues plaintiff “has not pled any viable theory of liability against these so-called Does[.]” Including Doe defendants is permissible and does not render a cause of action uncertain. OVERRULED. UNIVERSITY TO ANSWER WITHIN 15 DAYS. Sunkin’s Demurrer to First Amended Cross-Complaint Statute of Limitations Under Cal. Code of Civ.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

ARROW TOOLS, FASTENERS & SAW, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS RMC SUPPLY INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for: Breach of Express Written Contract; Common Count: Account Stated; Common Count: Open Book Account; Common Count: Indebitatus Assumpsit; Common Count: Quantum Valebant; and Breach of Personal Guaranty. On June 9, 2020, default was entered as to RMC Supply Inc. and Michael Stevens (hereinafter “Defendants”). On September 10, 2020, Plaintiff dismissed Does 1 through 100 without prejudice.

  • Hearing

    Sep 16, 2020

JAN CONKLIN, ET AL. VS KND DEVELOPMENT 53, LLC, ET AL.

., NTI-CA Inc. dba NTI Ground Trans, John Kindt, James Gleich each dba Destination Shuttle Services for (1) breach of written contract, (2) breach of oral agreement, (3) book account, (4) account stated, (5) quantum meruit, and (6) goods sold and delivered. Plaintiff alleges that it is a supplier of propane.

  • Hearing

    Sep 16, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

EDPO LLC DBA EXPO PROPANE FKA EXPO PROPANE, INC. VS DESTINATION SHUTTLE SERVICES, LLC, ET AL.

., NTI-CA Inc. dba NTI Ground Trans, John Kindt, James Gleich each dba Destination Shuttle Services for (1) breach of written contract, (2) breach of oral agreement, (3) book account, (4) account stated, (5) quantum meruit, and (6) goods sold and delivered. Plaintiff alleges that it is a supplier of propane.

  • Hearing

    Sep 16, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

FORWARDLINE FINANCIAL, LLC., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS ANTHONY SEO, AN INDIVIDUAL AND SOLE PROPRIETOR OF ROUND RESTAURANT

On January 9, 2020 Plaintiff filed a Complaint against Defendant for 1) Open Book Account; 2) Account Stated; 3) Reasonable Value; 4) Money Lent; 5) Breach of Written Contract; and 6) Breach of Written Guarantee. Plaintiff now moves the court for an order compelling Defendant’s responses to Plaintiff’s Form Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents as well as moves for an order deeming the matters in Plaintiff’s Request for Admissions admitted.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA COLLECTION SERVICE, INC. VS BOJER, INC.

On June 7, 2019, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Defendant and Does 1-10 for: Open Book Account Account Stated On July 10, 2019, Plaintiff filed a proof of service, which reflected that Defendant was personally served with the summons and complaint on June 19, 2019. On July 31, 2019, Defendant’s default was entered. On September 23, 2019, the court’s default judgment was filed.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

LEYEN FOOD, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS FEATHER FRESH FOODS, A COMPANY OF UNKNOWN FORM, ET AL.

On November 25, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), asserting causes of action against Defendants and Does 1-100 for: Breach of Written Contract Breach of Oral Contract Open Book Account Account Stated Goods Sold and Delivered A Case Management Conference is set for September 15, 2020. 1. Demurrer to Second Amended Complaint Legal Standard A demurrer for sufficiency tests whether the complaint states a cause of action. (Hahn v. Mirda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747; Code Civ.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MERCEDES-BENZ FINANCIAL SERVICES USA LLC VS AB GLOBAL SERVICES, INC., ET AL.

The complaint, filed May 25, 2020, alleges causes of action for: (1)-(2) possession of personal property and breach of contract; (3) book account; (4) account stated; and (5) breach of contract (guaranty). B. Application for Writ of Possession On July 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed two notices of application for writ of possession against Defendants ABGS and Buchek. The Court is not in receipt of an opposition brief.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

BRUNSING ASSOCIATES, INC. VS LEONARD SIMONIAN

(“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Leonard Simonian and Does 1-40 alleging: (1) breach of written contract; (2) foreclosure on Mechanics’ Lien; (3) recovery on Mechanics’ Lien release bond; (4) open book account; (5) account stated; and (6) quantum meruit. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants are “the owners, reputed owners, or leasehold owners of the real property located at 28876 Via Venezia, Malibu, California 90265” (Compl. ¶ 3.) Plaintiff alleges that the property burned in the 2018 Woolsey Fire.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

AMERICAN BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS SUPPLY CO, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION VS GAMEZ CONSTRUCTION INC, ET AL.

., filed suit against Gamez Construction, Inc. dba LGA Enterprises and Luis Donaldo Gamez, alleging: (1) breach of contract; (2) open book account; and (3) account stated. Default was entered against Defendants on June 29, 2020. Plaintiff now moves for a default judgment of $26,610.31, the amount it is allegedly owed by Defendants for materials purchased by Defendants and delivered under the contract.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

YES ONLINE INC VS EXCLUSIVE GLOBAL LOGISTICS INC

To that end, the Collection Agency asserts three causes of action: (1) breach of oral contract, (2) common count for work, labor, and services, and (3) common count for account stated. The Distributor filed an Answer in this case asserting, among other things, a defense of lack of standing.

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

LOGISTICS BY SUPRA LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS TRICAP INTERNATIONAL, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

The Complaint alleges the following causes of action: Breach of written agreement; Goods and services rendered; Account stated; Open book account; and Unjust enrichment. Currently before the Court are two demurrers: GAP and Polaris, together, demur to the Complaint; ADP and Cargomatic, together, demur to the Complaint. The motions are unopposed. Standard A demurrer tests the sufficiency of a complaint as a matter of law and raises only questions of law. (Schmidt v.

  • Hearing

    Sep 10, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

  • Judge

    Maurice A. Leiter or Salvatore Sirna

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 83     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.