|
Representative H & L Legal Malpractice
Cases
- Coogi Australia Pty. Ltd v. Jeffer,
Mangels, Butler & Marmaro (2001) [unpublished].
Conspiracy action brought by a corporation
and its American subsidiary against its law firm. Plaintiffs
claim that defendant law firm conspired with disloyal corporate
officers to drive down the companies value so the disloyal
corporate officers could purchase the companies at less than
market value. Defendant demurred, arguing that plaintiffs
failed to comply with Civil Code section 1714.10, requiring
plaintiffs to obtain leave of court before filing a cause
of action for civil conspiracy against an attorney. The trial
court overruled defendants demurrer, finding that section
1714.10 did not apply under the facts of this case. Defendant
appealed. The Court of Appeal affirmed, holding: (1) section
1714.10, subdivision (a) did not apply because the alleged
conspiracy did not "aris[e] from an[] attempt to compromise
a claim or dispute"; and (2) in any event, both of the
exceptions from section 1714.10, subdivision (c) applied,
because the complaint alleged defendant had an "independent
duty" to plaintiff and that it acted in furtherance of
its own "financial gain." We appeared as co-counsel
on behalf of plaintiffs and respondents.
- Piscitelli v. Friedenberg
(2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 953.
Legal malpractice action arising
from defendant attorney's failure to opt plaintiff client
out of a class action lawsuit, which resulted in the release
of plaintiff's claims against plaintiff's employer. The jury
awarded plaintiff $223,824,560 in malpractice damages, including
$221,389,400 representing the punitive damages plaintiff would
have obtained in an action against the defendant in the underlying
action. The Court of Appeal reversed, holding that "lost punitive
damages" are not recoverable against an attorney in a legal
malpractice action.
We appeared as co-counsel on behalf
of defendant and appellant Robert Friedenberg.
- Baker & McKenzie v. Contemporary
Services Corp. (2000) [unpublished].
Cross-action by defendant client
for professional negligence following plaintiff law firm's
action against the client for unpaid attorney fees, alleging,
inter alia, that plaintiff law firm negligently advised defendant
to settle the underlying litigation. After excluding the introduction
of all evidence concerning the settlement at trial, the trial
court granted a nonsuit on the malpractice claim. On the claim
for fees, the jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant.
Plaintiff's motion for a new trial was denied and both parties
appealed. The Court of Appeal reversed the judgment of nonsuit
on the malpractice claim as to the law firm, but not as to
the individual attorney, holding that the erroneous exclusion
of all evidence concerning the settlement was prejudicial.
The court affirmed the order denying a new trial, because
plaintiff failed to establish a basis for reversal.
We appeared as co-counsel on behalf
of defendant and cross-complainant.
- Midland National Life Insurance
Co. v. A. Tod Hindin (1999) [unpublished].
Action for professional negligence
by an insurer against former counsel to recover settlement
costs as a result of his mishandling of four insurance bad
faith cases. Defendant attorney cross-claimed in quantum meruit
for attorney fees and costs. The trial court directed verdicts
for defendant and entered an award of $320,209 in fees on
the cross-claim. The Court of Appeal reversed and remanded
for trial, allowing the insurer to pursue the malpractice
action as to claims based on two of the four underlying bad
faith cases.
We appeared as co-counsel on behalf
of plaintiff and cross-defendant.
- Saling v. Delevie
(1997) [unpublished].
Action for breach of the duty to
use the skill required of attorneys arising out of a partnership
buyout agreement. Jury returned a special verdict for defendant.
Trial court entered judgment for defendant. The Court of Appeal
affirmed, holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion
in excluding evidence regarding defendant's joint representation
of both partners and his financial investments because both
were immaterial and unnecessary to whether defendant breached
his duty.
We appeared as counsel on behalf
of defendants.
- Barioni v. Demetriou (1995)
[case settled].
Action addressing statute of limitations,
attorney/client relationship, and scope of relief in legal
malpractice action seeking over $6,000,000 in damages. Case
settled after we reviewed lengthy deposition transcripts and
provided comprehensive opinion letter.
We represented defendants.
- Ronson v. The Manchester
Group (1994) [formerly published at 24 Cal.App.4th
94].
Action brought by members of limited
partnership based upon defendants' legal advice to general
partner. Trial court denied defendants' motion for summary
judgment. Before we were consulted on the case, the Court
of Appeal affirmed, holding defendants owed a duty to nonclient
third-party plaintiffs.
We filed a petition for review, and
succeeded in persuading the Supreme Court to decertify the
opinion as precedent for future cases.
- Hauben v. Scope (1994)
[unpublished].
Action for breach of fiduciary duty.
Trial court entered $1,500,200 in compensatory damages and
$300,000 in punitive damages. Court of Appeal eliminated the
punitive damages and reduced the noneconomic damages by $75,000.
We appeared as co-counsel of record
on behalf of defendants.
- Laird v. Blacker
(1992) 2 Cal.4th 606.
Action addressing statute of limitations
in legal malpractice suits. Jury awarded $1,691,000 in damages.
Court of Appeal reversed, holding the statute of limitations
had run. Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal decision,
holding that when a client discharges his attorney and appeals
from an adverse trial court judgment, the appeal does not
toll the statute of limitation on the client's legal malpractice
suit.
We appeared as co-counsel of record
on behalf of defendants.
- Sitton v. Geffner & Satzman
(1992) [unpublished].
Action arising out of alleged failure
to advise client re potential tort claims and to warn of applicable
statute of limitations. Trial court granted defendant's motion
for nonsuit because plaintiff failed to designate necessary
expert witness. Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for
new trial, holding trial court abused its discretion in denying
plaintiff leave to file tardy expert-witness designation.
We appeared as co-counsel of record
on behalf of defendant.
- Madden v. Perry (1992)
[unpublished].
Action for failure to bring a third
party negligence action on plaintiff's behalf. Trial court
granted summary judgment for defendants. Court of Appeal affirmed,
holding that no duties were owed to plaintiff due to nonexistence
of sufficient attorney/client relationship.
We appeared as co-counsel of record
on behalf of defendants.
- Allyn Transportation Co.
v. Mitchell, Silberberg & Knupp (1991) [unpublished].
Action for breach of professional
duty. Trial court granted summary judgment on behalf of defendant.
Court of Appeal affirmed, holding attorney's advice was reasonable
due to uncertainty in the law.
We appeared as co-counsel of record
on behalf of defendant.
- United Community Church v.
Garcin (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 327.
Action arising out of alleged attorney
neglect resulting in default judgment in underlying action.
Trial court granted plaintiff's motion for summary adjudication
on liability and entered judgment for over $2,000,000. Court
of Appeal reversed and remanded with directions to vacate
judgment in its entirety and to vacate a portion of the order
summarily adjudicating the issues.
We appeared as co-counsel of record
on behalf of defendants.
- Holliday v. Jones
(1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 102.
Action for professional negligence
and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress
after client's conviction of involuntary manslaughter of his
wife was reversed on grounds of attorney incompetence. Client
was thereafter acquitted at a retrial. Trial court awarded
$400,000 in compensatory damages to plaintiff and $150,000
in compensatory damages for each child. Court of Appeal affirmed
the $400,000 award to the plaintiff, holding attorney was
negligent in failing to perform reasonably and competently
in a criminal case, but reversed the $150,000 award for each
child, holding the scope of an attorney's duty in representing
a client in a criminal case does not include responsibility
to his client's family members, whom the attorney does not
represent.
We appeared as co-counsel of record
on behalf of defendant.
- Bunting v. Shalant
(1988) [settled on appeal].
Action for alleged failure to name
all potential defendants in underlying action. Jury awarded
$442,983 in compensatory damages and $53,556 in prejudgment
interest. Trial court subsequently awarded $192,765.95 in
prejudgment interest, but offset this amount by the jury interest
award for a net allowance of $139,215.95 in interest. Defendant
appealed, claiming that awards of prejudgment interest pursuant
to Civil Code sections 3291 and 3288 were not authorized.
Case settled after we filed Appellants' Opening Brief.
We appeared as co-counsel of record
on behalf of defendants.
Home
| Firm Directory | About H &
L | Practice Areas | H
& L News
Seminars | Publications
| Recruiting | Directions
| Links | Site
Map
|
