Burnett v Cole
MOTIONS TO QUASH SUBPOENAS (2)
Calendar: 20
Case No: EC062988
Date: 4/21/16
MP: Defendants, Terence Price, Rick Cole, and Rick Cole Auctions, Inc.
RP: Plaintiff, Brian Burnett
RELIEF REQUESTED:
1. Order quashing subpoena for person most knowledgeable from third party, Rawsport Motors, LLC, to appear at trial; order imposing monetary sanctions of $4,770.
2. Order quashing subpoena for third party, Eric Brooks, to appear at trial; order imposing monetary sanctions of $4,770.
DISCUSSION:
This case arises from the Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant, Terence Price, breached a partnership agreement under which the parties engaged in the business of marketing and selling rare and collectible automobiles. The Plaintiff would locate the automobiles and find buyers to purchase the automobiles from the Defendant, Terence Price. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant breached this agreement so that he could earn greater profits without the Plaintiff
Hearing Date
April 21, 2017
Type
Othr Breach Contr/Warr-not Fraud (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Burnett v Cole
MOTIONS TO QUASH SUBPOENAS (2)
Calendar: 20
Case No: EC062988
Date: 4/21/16
MP: Defendants, Terence Price, Rick Cole, and Rick Cole Auctions, Inc.
RP: Plaintiff, Brian Burnett
RELIEF REQUESTED:
1. Order quashing subpoena for person most knowledgeable from third party, Rawsport Motors, LLC, to appear at trial; order imposing monetary sanctions of $4,770.
2. Order quashing subpoena for third party, Eric Brooks, to appear at trial; order imposing monetary sanctions of $4,770.
DISCUSSION:
This case arises from the Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant, Terence Price, breached a partnership agreement under which the parties engaged in the business of marketing and selling rare and collectible automobiles. The Plaintiff would locate the automobiles and find buyers to purchase the automobiles from the Defendant, Terence Price. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant breached this agreement so that he could earn greater profits without the Plaintiff