Our Practice

We have represented clients in complex litigation in federal and state courts, administrative proceedings and private arbitrations and mediations. We have substantial experience in a broad range of complex business and tort cases including antitrust and trade regulation, contractual disputes, business torts, investment and other business fraud, real estate disputes, sports and entertainment, consumer law, employment, mass tort, product liability, professional liability, securities, trade secrets and unfair competition matters.  We also provide general advice regarding contract negotiations, internal and governmental investigations, pre-litigation disputes and general business issues. 

Our clients have included Fortune 500 companies, major law firms, financial services entities, bankruptcy estates, partnerships, medium and small businesses and individuals. Examples of the distinct industry sectors include the following:  

Professional Liability

We have substantial experience in professional liability matters involving accountants, attorneys and actuaries.  Our lawyers have been involved in professional liability matters on behalf of both plaintiffs and defendants.  Our cases have not only involved traditional negligence claims, but also claims against professionals charging fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, negligent misrepresentation, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, patent infringement, violations of the antitrust laws and RICO violations.  We have also litigated fee disputes between professionals and their clients. 

We are often called upon to assess potential problems before they arise so as to limit liability and unnecessary exposure.  We have counseled lawyers and law firms on a variety of matters affecting their internal operations, including partnership relations, employee discipline, employment-related matters, professional ethics, management structure and internal controls and evaluation of potential merger possibilities.  Our lawyers have also served as consultants and expert witnesses on issues relating to the applicable standard of care and the reasonableness of attorneys fees. 

Banking & Financial Services

We have represented banks, investment banks, private equity groups, retirement investment funds and securities brokers, and their employees, officers and directors, in breach of fiduciary duty, contract, fraud, lender liability, professional liability, securities, tax shelter, trade secrets and unfair competition cases in state and federal courts, and in FINRA (formerly NASD) and private arbitrations and mediations.

Energy

We have represented oil and gas companies, drilling companies, pipeline operators, refinery operators, power generators and utilities in a broad range of cases involving every phase of the energy industry.  These cases have taken us throughout the United States and abroad. We have also handled internal and governmental investigations for energy clients. 

Entertainment

We have represented guilds, production companies and studios in contract, employment, intellectual property and securities matters.

Health Care

We have represented hospitals, insurers and pharmaceutical companies in antitrust, contract, corporate control and unfair competition cases, as well as internal and governmental investigations. 

Appeals

Our appellate practice serves not only clients that we have represented in the trial court, but also clients who have retained us for the purposes of appeal.  Our appellate practice covers a broad array of civil litigation matters. Our practice includes not only direct appeals from final orders and judgments, but also interlocutory and writ petitions. 

Representative Matters 

The following matters are representative of the depth and diversity of the cases our lawyers have handled:

PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY

• Representation of a small aircraft parts manufacturer in a fraud and malpractice case against a Big Five accounting firm. The jury returned a $42 million verdict in favor of the client.
• Representation of a large public employee pension fund in a malpractice action against an international consulting firm.  The matter settled on a confidential basis just prior to trial.
• Representation of a large national law firm in a multi-million dollar malpractice case arising out of its representation of a bank. The trial court held that the case was  time-barred under the statute of limitations. The California Supreme Court ultimately affirmed the trial court’s dismissal order.
• Representation of a well known Los Angeles litigation boutique in a malpractice case in which the firm’s former client named four separate law firms as defendants. The trial court dismissed the claims against the law firm on demurrer. 
• Representation of a large national law firm in an interference with contract case in which the firm was sued for allegedly disregarding a law firm’s lien when disbursing proceeds of a settlement.  After a few strategically chosen depositions, the case settled for an amount far below the cost of defense. 
• Representation of a garment manufacturer whose bookkeeper had embezzled monies from the firm without detection from its accountants.  The matter was resolved favorably to the client shortly after an accounting malpractice complaint was filed against the accounting firm. 
• Consulting with the partners in a small Los Angeles law firm on the structuring of their partnership and the development of a system for dividing their profits. 
• Representation of a Los Angeles firm in the expulsion of a partner. 

BUSINESS LITIGATION

• Representation of two professional basketball players in litigation arising out of their business manager’s embezzlement of millions of dollars from them. The representation not only involved the filing of civil litigation which resulted in a financial recovery from four separate defendants, but also the instigation of a criminal investigation which resulted in the criminal conviction of the business manager. 
• Representation of a real estate developer in an arbitration filed by a land planner who sought a multi-million dollar recovery arising out of the development of the Lake at Las Vegas project. The arbitrator’s award was a fraction of what the land planner claimed as damages and was far more favorable than the developer’s pre-arbitration settlement offer to the land planner. 
• Representation of the former owners of a mining company who were named defendants in a securities fraud case arising out of their sale of stock in the company. The plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed by the court on the first day of trial, following the admission of exhibits damaging to their case. 
• Representation of an individual plaintiff in the trial of a securities fraud lawsuit that was filed by another lawyer.  After being cross-examined on the first day of trial on a different theory of liability than had been pursued by the prior lawyer during the deposition phase of the case, the defendant offered a settlement favorable to the plaintiff.
• Representation of a group of corporations and lawyers in a malicious prosecution case filed by an individual who had been acquitted in a criminal insurance fraud case.  A number of the claims against the defendants were dismissed on a demurrer and the remainder of the claims were successfully resolved by an order granting summary judgment to the defendants.
• Representation of a professional basketball player whose shoe contract was terminated by the shoe manufacturer for violation of the morals clause in the contract.  The arbitrator held that the shoe company did not have the right to terminate the contract. 
• Defense of a hospital in a class action alleging state antitrust claims. Summary judgment for the defendants was granted and the case is on appeal. 
• Defense of a Section 2 monopolization claim for a major electronic manufacturer.  Obtained summary judgment in favor of client. 
• Representation of a Hospital in litigation with a medical group. Defense of claims for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty.  Prosecution of claims for breach of partnership agreement and breach of fiduciary duty.  Tried cases in multiple phases, obtaining favorable results in each.
• Defense of coordinated class actions alleging wage and benefit fixing in the U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey.  Defeated class certification.
• In the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, defense of officers and directors against federal and state securities, breach of fiduciary duty and fraud claims.  Case settled on favorable terms. 
• NASD Arbitration Panel.  Defense of claims for misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition.  Successfully opposed application for preliminary injunction and compelled NASD arbitration.  Case settled on favorable terms. 
• Defense of claim against biotechnology company for breach of patent license agreement.  Case settled on favorable terms. 
• Defense of officers and directors in San Francisco County Superior Court in four related shareholder derivative and individual claims asserting breaches of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and interference with contract.  Defeated motion for preliminary injunction.  Case settled on favorable terms. 
• Obtained summary judgment for a regional medical center in defending a claim for breach of charitable trust.  Affirmed on appeal.
• In Hood v. Superior Court (United Chambers Administrators, Inc.), 33 Cal. App. 4th 319 (1995), obtained injunction based on unfair competition and misappropriation of trade secrets and summary judgment on contract, unfair competition and antitrust cross-claims.
• Defense of investment bank in connection with professional negligence and fraud claims arising from the acquisition of MGM.  Case settled on favorable terms.
• In the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, defended antitrust case related to patent infringement case filed in another district.  Actions resolved by agreement under which adverse party ceased production and sale of infringing products.
• In Johnson v. Reserve Life Ins. Co., 765 F. Supp. 1478 (C.D. Cal. 1991),  obtained summary judgment of claims for breach of contract and bad faith on ERISA preemption grounds.  
• Defense of a major electronic manufacturer against claims for breach of contract relating to television advertising.  Case settled on favorable terms on eve of trial.
• Defense of advertising agency against claims for breach of contract and quantum meruit.  Client prevailed on contract claim and jury awarded nominal quantum meruit damages.

ENERGY

• In the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, represented an oil company in an action to enforce a foreign arbitration award through attachment proceedings.
• Represented a major oil company in three separate litigations arising from three different explosions and fires at a local refinery.  Each case involved between 10,000 and 27,000 personal injury claims.  In all matters, we defeated injunctive and class certification efforts.  We brought order to a nearly unmanageable set of circumstances and disposed of the matters with virtually no imposition on the refinery personnel or operations.  All cases were either settled on reasonable terms or dismissed for failure to comply with court ordered case management.
• Representation of Unocal before the FTC in connection with the sale of an agricultural products business.  Regulatory approval obtained upon negotiation of asset divestiture.
• International Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers, Local 7-517 et al. v. UNO-VEN Company et al., 170 F.3d 779 (7^th Cir. 1999). Defense of claim by union to enjoin transaction based on federal labor laws. Summary judgment affirmed by Seventh Circuit.
• In the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, defended class action against Mobil arising from alleged toxic release at a refinery.  Defeated class certification.
• Ford v. Mobil Oil Corporation, et al., Louisiana State Court.  We were substituted into this mass tort case arising from a refinery explosion approximately 90 days prior to trial.  A class had already been certified.  We obtained certiori from the Louisiana Supreme Court and convinced it to de-certify the class and dismiss the action.  Ford v. Murphy Oil, Mobil, et al., 703 So. 2^nd 542 (1997).  Another related mass tort refinery explosion case, Lailhengue, was settled during trial.
• In Santa Santa Barbara County Superior Court, defended a major oil company against preferential rights claim arising from the sale of its upstream assets in California.  Negotiated settlement on favorable terms.
• Obtained a significant recovery for an oil company for lost revenue and property damage caused by defective equipment sold by defendants which led to an explosion, fire and refinery shutdown. 
• Defended an oil company in connection with multiple property damage claims arising from subsidence allegedly caused by oil production.  All claims settled on favorable terms.
• Offshore Explosion,  U.S. District Court, Central District of California.  Our client owned and operated a heavy weather semi-submersible oil drilling vessel working in the North Sea off the coast of Scotland.  During an oil test, a third party contractor caused an explosion resulting in damage to the vessel and several fatalities.  We presented a claim against the contractor recovering our client’s lost revenue and repair damages and defended the wrongful death actions.  Additionally, we represented the client in governmental investigations conducted by U.S. and U.K. agencies.  
• Parejo Ltd. 1981 v. Getty Oil Co., et al., 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17671 (E.D. Cal. 1991).  Defense of claims for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty and accounting in connection with oil and gas joint venture agreement in which plaintiff sought more than $1 billion in damages.  After three month trial, obtained complete defense victory. 
• Defended an energy company in related cases filed by several hundred homeowners whose property surrounded a landfill seeking recovery for property damage and personal injury against owners and operators of the landfill, as well as the various companies who conducted business at the facility.  We obtained a dismissal on behalf of our client which extracted methane gas from the landfill for commercial sale.
• A shopping center in a heavily populated area ignited due to migrating methane gas.  In approximately 30 lawsuits for property damages, lost revenue and personal injuries, we successfully defended an oil company whose predecessor entities allegedly had conducted exploration, production and storage operations in the vicinity.
• Obtained a verdict in Federal District Court in Alaska declaring unconstitutional a state oil pollution clean-up scheme which sought to impose substantial monetary charges on certain entities involved in the handling and transportation of crude oil from the North Slope.  
• We have defended hundreds of personal injury cases of all types including catastrophic injuries (wrongful death, paralysis, burns, brain damage, etc.) and mass tort claims, particularly involving acute and chronic exposure allegations. Due to the range of cases we have handled, we have developed particular expertise in effective case management; challenging and defending the scientific reliability and relevance of expert testimony; defending medical monitoring claims; defending fear-of-disease claims; and attacking causation. The nature of our practice has caused us to have to deal with so called scientific experts from a very wide range of disciplines.

 APPELLATE

• Convinced the California Supreme Court to resolve a split of authority in the Court of Appeal by adopting a narrow construction of the “continuous representation” tolling provisions of the California attorney malpractice statement of limitations, thereby reinstating the trial court’s dismissal of a legal malpractice case against a law firm and one of its former partners.
• Successfully defended an order granting summary judgment in favor of two corporations and a group of lawyers in a malicious prosecution case arising out of a failed criminal insurance fraud prosecution. 
• Obtained the reversal of an order granting summary judgment for a Big Five accounting firm in a fraud and malpractice case arising out of the accounting firm’s work as expert witnesses.  The decision created a nationally significant precedent for the proposition that expert witnesses are not immune from suits brought by their own clients.
• Obtained a significant reduction in damages for a defendant who had been found liable for fraud after a trial in which he had been represented by another law firm. 
• Crowell v. Downey Community Hospital Found. 95 Cal. App. 4th 730 (2002).  Defense of action to compel arbitration of contract dispute.  In case of first impression, the Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal, holding that parties cannot agree to judicial review of binding arbitration awards.
• International Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers, Local 7-517 et al. v. UNO-VEN Company et al., 170 F.3d 779 (7th Cir. 1999).  Defense of claim by union to enjoin transaction based on federal labor laws.  Summary judgment affirmed by Seventh Circuit.