Case Background
The Carlton Group, Ltd., a New York-based real estate investment bank, filed a lawsuit against Amond World, LLC and Origo, LLC in the Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County, on February 2, 2023. The case centered on an unpaid brokerage commission stemming from an exclusive advisory agreement. Carlton Group claimed it was owed at least $3,545,000 in commission after it introduced Amond World to Origo, which led to a $101.3 million financing deal for a cold storage facility in Madera, California.
Cause
In March 2021, Amond World retained Carlton Group as its sole and exclusive broker to find debt and equity financing for the construction of a refrigerated cold storage warehouse on 30 acres of land near Highway 99 in Madera County. Carlton Group identified and contacted Origo, LLC in May 2021, arranged an introductory call between the parties, and facilitated negotiations that resulted in a Letter of Intent signed on June 22, 2021. Origo agreed to provide $101.3 million in total capitalization for the project. Despite Carlton Group earning its commission under the contract, Amond World refused to pay, arguing that Origo's investment did not constitute "financing" under the agreement. Carlton Group alleged that the deal was intentionally structured as a "lease" to avoid triggering the commission payment.
Injury
Carlton Group suffered financial harm through the loss of its earned brokerage commission. The firm performed its contractual duties by sourcing and introducing a capital partner yet received no payment. Amond World also excluded Carlton Group from later-stage negotiations and failed to provide transaction documents as required under the agreement.
Damages Sought
Carlton Group sought not less than $3,545,500 in damages, plus interest, attorneys' fees, and costs. It also sought punitive damages against Origo for intentional interference with contractual relations.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: The Carlton Group, Ltd.
· Counsel for Plaintiff: David W. Affeld | Brian R. England | Edward E. Johnson
Defendant: Amond World, LLC
· Counsel for Defendant Amond World: Richard J. Zuromski, Jr.
Defendant: Origo, LLC
· Counsel for Defendant Origo: Mona J. Geidl
· Joint Expert: Steven Edrington
Claims
Breach of Written Contract (Against Amond World): Carlton Group argued that Amond World breached the Exclusive Debt & Equity Advisory Agreement by failing to pay the 3.5% commission owed on the $101.3 million financing that Origo committed to the project. The commission became due upon the initial closing of the transaction. Carlton Group also contended that Amond World shut it out of later negotiations and withheld required transaction documents.
Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing (Against Amond World): Carlton Group maintained that Amond World acted in bad faith by attempting to circumvent its exclusive agent and structuring the deal with Origo to avoid paying the earned commission.
Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations (Against Origo): Carlton Group alleged that Origo knew about the exclusive agreement yet participated in structuring the transaction in a way designed to deprive Carlton Group of its commission. Carlton Group claimed Origo's conduct was willful, oppressive, and malicious.
Defense
Amond World filed a demurrer on April 3, 2023, challenging all causes of action in the complaint for failure to state sufficient facts. The defense argued that Carlton Group's claims for breach of written contract, breach of implied covenant, unjust enrichment, and goods and services rendered each lacked adequate factual support under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 430.10(e). Amond World's central defense position was that the transaction with Origo was structured as a build-to-suit net lease not a financing arrangement and therefore did not trigger the commission obligation under the advisory agreement.
Jury Verdict
The case went to trial on September 3, 2025, before Judge Julia Alloggiamento in Department 9 of the Santa Clara County Superior Court. A jury of twelve was impanelled and sworn. Testimony began on September 8, 2025, and the matter was submitted to the jury on September 17, 2025. The jury returned its verdict on September 18, 2025.
On the breach of contract claim against Amond World, the jury answered "Yes" to all five questions on the verdict form. The jury found that Carlton Group and Amond World entered into a contract, that Carlton Group performed its obligations, that conditions for Amond World's performance occurred, that Amond World failed to do what the contract required, and that Carlton Group was harmed. The jury awarded Carlton Group $3,545,499 in economic damages for breach of contract.
On the breach of implied covenant claim against Amond World, the jury again answered "Yes" to all five questions. The jury found that Amond World unfairly interfered with Carlton Group's right to receive the benefits of the contract and that Carlton Group was harmed. The jury awarded $1 in nominal damages on this claim.
On the intentional interference claim against Origo, the jury found that a contract existed, that Origo knew about it, that Origo's conduct prevented or made performance more difficult, and that Origo intended to disrupt performance. However, on the critical fifth question whether Origo's conduct was a substantial factor in causing harm to Carlton Group the jury answered "No." As a result, Origo was found not liable and no damages were awarded against it.
The Court entered judgment on October 24, 2025, ordering Amond World to pay Carlton Group $3,545,500 in damages, with interest at ten percent per annum from the date of the verdict until paid.
Court documents are available upon request at [email protected]
