Enea v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 513 (2005)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Benny Enea (plaintiff) sued William and Claudia Daniels (defendants), his former partners, for breaching their fiduciary duties to the partnership by renting the partnership’s sole asset, an office building, to themselves at less than fair market value. The Monterey County Superior Court (superior court) granted the Danielses’ motion for summary judgment. The superior court held that under California law, the Danielses had no fiduciary duty to pay fair market rent absent an agreement requiring them to do so. Enea petitioned the California Court of Appeal, seeking a writ of mandate requiring the superior court to set aside its previous order and deny the Danielses’ motion for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rushing, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
