1. Motion by Plaintiff/Cross-defendant Guillermo Woodward for Summary Judgment or, in the alternative, Summary Adjudication:

DENIED

As to plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, the motion is denied as to the first, second, third, and fifth causes of action, due to the existence of triable issues of fact.

As to the first cause of action for fraudulent inducement, there are triable issues as to the element of misrepresentation. (Moving Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 1-4; Responding Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 1-4, 25, 266, 267, 279.)

As to the second cause of action for breach of contract, there are triable issues as to the terms of the alleged contract, plaintiff’s performance, and breach. (Moving Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 23-30 [contract terms], 33-35 [performance and/or excuse for nonperformance, damages], 37, 38 [breach]; Responding Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 23, 24, 25 [terms], 31, 34, 303-305, 307, 308 [performance and/or excuse for nonperformance].)

As to the third cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, there are triable issues as to the existence of an underlying contract, which is a necessary requirement of this cause of action. (Love v. Fire Insurance Exchange (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 1136, 1153; Moving Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 45-52, 56, 60, 61; Responding Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 45-47, 55, 335, 337, 338.)

As to the fifth cause of action for unfair business practices, the same disputed issues as to the breach of contract and fraud claims also require denial of the motion as to this cause of action. (Moving Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 92-99 [existence and terms of contract], 103 [performance and damages], 107-108 [breach]; 92-94, 102 [misrepresentation]; RP Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 92-94, 403 [disputed terms of contract, dispute as to alleged representations], 405, 406, 407 [performance].)

As to the fourth cause of action of plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, the motion is denied, as moving party has not met his initial burden of presenting evidence sufficient to prove element of this cause of action. (CCP 437c(p)(1).)

As to the First Amended Cross-complaint, the motion is denied as to the first, second, fourth, and fifth causes of action, due to the existence of triable issues of material fact.

As to the first cause of action for breach of contract, there are triable issues of material fact as to the element of damages. (Moving Party Separate Statement, Fact No. 118; Responding Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 118, 452.)

As to the second cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, there are triable issues as to the terms of the alleged contract, performance, breach, and damages. (Moving Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 119-126, 129 [existence and terms of contract], 130 [performance and damages], 134, 135 [breach], 118 [damages]; Responding Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 119-121, 129, 473 [disputed terms], 475, 476, 477 [performance]; 118 [damages].)

As to the fourth cause of action for intentional interference with contractual relations, there are triable issues as to: (1) the existence of a contractual relationship (Moving Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 155, 156; Responding Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 155, 156); (2) whether moving party was aware of the s alleged contractual relationships. (Moving Party Separate Statement, Fact No. 157; Responding Party Separate Statement, Fact No. 157); and (3) as to alleged breach of the written agreement for the 2016 Boat (Moving Party Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 158-160; Responding Separate Statement, Fact Nos. 158-160).

As to the fifth cause of action for intentional interference with prospective economic relations, there are triable issues as to: (1) the existence of an economic relationship (Moving Party ... ..........................................................