Interquest Corporation, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Iliff, Thorn & Company, Richard C. Thomas, Aka: Dickthomas; Kevin P. Armstrong; Domenico Brown &lavoie, Inc.; Alfred John Di Domenico,aka: Alfred J. Domenico,defendants-appellees, 8 F.3d 27 (9th Cir. 1993)

 Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 8 F.3d 27 (9th Cir. 1993) Argued and Submitted Oct. 5, 1993. Decided Nov. 3, 1993

Before: SKOPIL, HALL, and RYMER, Circuit Judges

MEMORANDUM* 

Interquest appeals the district court grant of defendants' motion for summary judgment. We affirm. The district court correctly concluded that there is no triable issue of fact that Interquest acted as a broker and not as a finder in the unsuccessful transaction. Accordingly, Interquest's contract claims are barred under Cal.Bus. & Prof.Code § 10136 (West 1987). We conclude that Interquest's fraud claims are also barred by section 10136, pursuant to the rational in Hydrotech Systems v. Oasis Waterpark, 277 Cal. Rptr. 517, 52 Cal.3d. 999 (1991).

AFFIRMED.

 *

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.