Bublitz, DC Marketing v. Tsang,
David Bublitz, dba
DC Marketing, Plaintiff and Appellee
Abies Tsang, dba
Purple Rooster, Defendant and Appellant
East Central Judicial District,
Judge Ralph Robert Erickson
|Nature of Action:||Contracts|
|Term:||05/2000  Argument: 05/18/2000|
|ND cite:||2000 ND 100|
617 N.W.2d 131
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
I. Case Should Not Be Tried In North Dakota.
II. Purple Rooster LLC (a California Limited Liability Company) should be the defendant.
III. No written agreement to show period of time covered, what particular sales were covered or percentage of compensation for overriding of sales.
IV. Documentation from both Appellant and Appellee shows Appellant was paid in full for all jobs.
V. Cass County Court Should Not Had Tried This Case; and when It Tried This Case, Treated Mr. Abies Tsang unfairly.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1. Whether the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction over the oral sales agreement between the parties because Tsang alleges that a written contract exists in which one of the terms dictates that any disputes that may arise from the oral sales agreement are to resolved in Solano County.
2. Even if subject matter jurisdiction exists, whether the court was clearly erroneous in awarding a judgment in favor of Bublitz and against Tsang because the findings of facts do not support the court's conclusions of law.
3. Whether the judgment is binding against Tsang personally because Purple Rooster is a corporation and the proper defendant is the corporation, not Abies Tsang personally.
|Add Docket 990313 RSS|
|1||10/15/1999 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 10/14/1999|
|2||11/16/1999 RECORD ON APPEAL & separates 32, 33, 60 (transcripts); not rec'd - 18, 21, 47, 50, 67, 89, 94,|
|3||11/16/1999 102 & 112 (steno notes & tapes)|
|4||12/10/1999 Faxed copies of undated letters from Abies Tsang regarding an ext/time/file OTR|
|5||12/13/1999 Faxed copy of letter from Abies Tsang w/attached copy of letter to Eloise Haaland re: transcript|
|6||12/13/1999 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF (Letter from Mr. Tsang)|
|7||12/13/1999 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE (AT must file ATB by 12-27-99 or have written confirmation that an attorney. granted: 12/27/1999|
|8||12/13/1999 has agreed to represent him or the appeal will be referred to Court for dismissal.)|
|9||12/27/1999 APPELLANT BRIEF|
|10||01/18/2000 DISK - ATB|
|11||01/21/2000 Ltr dtd 1-14-00 w/Incomplete Appendix recd from AT|
|12||01/21/2000 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF (Sua Sponte)|
|13||01/21/2000 ACTION BY CLERK (See PM ltr of 1-21-00). Granted: 03/05/2000|
|14||02/23/2000 Per GWV, Appellant's "Appendix" will not be filed as it does not comply with Rule 30, NDRAppP|
|15||03/02/2000 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF (sua sponte)(based upon rejection of ATA)|
|16||03/02/2000 ACTION BY CLERK (30 days from rejection of ATA). Granted: 03/25/2000|
|17||03/13/2000 Cy of letter from Abies Tsang to Cass County Dist. Court|
|18||03/20/2000 APPELLEE BRIEF|
|19||03/20/2000 APPELLEE APPENDIX|
|20||03/21/2000 Clerk's Supplement Cert of ROA dated 3/20/2000 with entries 120 & 121 attached|
|21||03/30/2000 Corrected T.O.A. & pages vii, ix, & x for AEB (inserted)|
|22||03/30/2000 DISK - AEB|
|23||04/05/2000 Letter dated 3-31-00 from Abies Tsang|
|24||05/18/2000 APPEARANCES: Abies Tsang; Dennis W. Lindquist|
|25||05/18/2000 ARGUED: Lindquist; Tsang (argued in reverse order) (Vol. X; page 30)|
|26||05/18/2000 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|27||05/25/2000 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED BY SUMMARY DISP.|
|28||05/25/2000 UNANIMOUS OPINION: , Per Curiam|
|29||05/25/2000 Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellee|
|30||05/26/2000 Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|31||06/08/2000 PETITION FOR REHEARING|
|32||06/12/2000 DISK - PER|
|33||06/29/2000 ANNOUNCED DISQUALIFICATION: Kapsner, Carol Ronning|
|34||06/29/2000 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (PER). Denied|
|36||07/13/2000 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|37||02/15/2007 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|