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 10:45am|
|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.)|
|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|
|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|