jim cortinez dba jc construction v. zk building and development, inc.
motion to strike plaintiff’s tac
Date of Hearing: September 11, 2020 Trial Date: None set.
Department: W Case No.: 19VECV01222
Moving Party: Defendants Pierskalla Family Trust and Dion Pierskalla as Trustee for the Pierskalla Family Trust
Responding Party: Plaintiff Jim Cortinez dba JC Construction
Meet and Confer: Yes (Kirkner Decl. ¶5-9.)
BACKGROUND
This action arises out of a breach of a construction contract. Plaintiff alleges he entered into a written agreement with Defendant ZK Building whereby Plaintiff agreed to furnish labor, service, equipment, and materials on the subject property and Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff $32,500. Plaintiff further alleges Defendants asked Plaintiff to perform additional services beyond those included in the original agreement. The subject property is owned by Defendant Pierskalla Family Trust.
To date, Plaintiff alleges he has only been paid $32,500 for all work perf
Type
Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
jim cortinez dba jc construction v. zk building and development, inc.
motion to strike plaintiff’s tac
Date of Hearing: September 11, 2020 Trial Date: None set.
Department: W Case No.: 19VECV01222
Moving Party: Defendants Pierskalla Family Trust and Dion Pierskalla as Trustee for the Pierskalla Family Trust
Responding Party: Plaintiff Jim Cortinez dba JC Construction
Meet and Confer: Yes (Kirkner Decl. ¶5-9.)
BACKGROUND
This action arises out of a breach of a construction contract. Plaintiff alleges he entered into a written agreement with Defendant ZK Building whereby Plaintiff agreed to furnish labor, service, equipment, and materials on the subject property and Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff $32,500. Plaintiff further alleges Defendants asked Plaintiff to perform additional services beyond those included in the original agreement. The subject property is owned by Defendant Pierskalla Family Trust.
To date, Plaintiff alleges he has only been paid $32,500 for all work perf