1 / 7

Opening Statement

Opening Statement. Maglica v. Maglica State of California Superior Court January 1992. Reasons For Lawsuit. Prove that Claire Maglica and Anthony Maglica were co-owners of Mag Instruments.

kimn
Télécharger la présentation

Opening Statement

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Opening Statement Maglica v. Maglica State of California Superior Court January 1992 Representing Plaintiff- Claire Maglica

  2. Reasons For Lawsuit • Prove that Claire Maglica and Anthony Maglica were co-owners of Mag Instruments. • Claire and Anthony Maglica made an oral contract concerning their marriage and the company ownership in May 1971. • Disprove the validity of the Separate Property Agreement signed in 1977 by Claire Maglica.

  3. Undisputed Facts of the Case • Claire and Anthony never legally married • Claire did work as an executive for the company Mag Instrument for 20 years • A Separate Property Agreement was signed in 1977 by Claire Maglica. • Claire and Anthony did reside together in a state of marital like relationship for 23 years

  4. Plaintiff’s Testimony • Claire claims that on May 14, 1971 at the Western Motel in Palm Springs that she and Mr. Maglica made a binding verbal contract concerning joint ownership and operation of the business. • Claire also claims that on May, 14 1971 at the St. Patrick Cathedral in New York the she and Mr. Maglica exchanged vows and rings and married in the church. • Claire states that she was not only joint owner but also acting as Executive Vice President of Mag Instruments for nearly 20 years. • Claire’s claims that she did not know she was signing a Separate Property Agreement releasing her rights to the company in 1977.

  5. Claire’s Role in Maglica Instruments • Claire acted as Executive Vice President for the company for nearly 20 years. • Claire completed payroll each month for the company. • Claire was present and assisted in all decision making aspects of Maglica Instruments along with Anthony Maglica. Maglica Instruments

  6. Defendant’s Testimony • Anthony Maglica claims that there was never a verbal agreement made in regards to marriage or the company’s ownership interest. • Mr. Maglica states that Claire was an important part of the company but that she was nothing more than an employee. • Mr. Maglica claims that Claire holds no interest in Maglica Instruments and that he is retains 100% interest in the company himself.

  7. Conclusion • Cleary the plaintiff and defendant resided in a marriage like relationship for 23 years. • Claire Maglica was in fact a major part of the company’s every day operation and overall success. • Claire and Anthony never formally got married so it is up to the court to decide what if any assets are to be divided between the two.

More Related