Our fall issue of Perspectives once again shows the Firm’s breadth of experience and knowledge, and continues to present timely, useful articles on business and planning issues our clients face.  But rather than whet your appetite for these articles by summarizing them here, I would prefer to use this pulpit to spotlight our growing litigation practice. Over the years, our litigation group has grown in expericne, added new areas of expertise, and most importantly added great lawyers. In the past few months our skilled team of litigators have delivered tremendous results, highlighting our range of practice areas, industries that we serve, and courts in which we practice. Our attorneys handle trials, arbitrations and appeals throughoutCalifornia in all kinds of matters, from real estate to construction to probate to intellectual property and trade secrets. And they win. Here are some samples: 

A Napa County Superior Court judge ruled in favor of Carr McClellan’s clients in a difficult trust litigation case.  During a two-week trial, Dave King and John Minton proved that a trust, which substantially disinherited our clients (two of the grantors’ children), was created as a result of undue influence by a half-brother.  The trial judge invalidated the challenged trust, and in doing so also found that financial elder abuse had been committed, entitling our clients to recover their attorneys’ fees. 

In a trademark infringement case in federal court inLos Angeles, Barry Parker and John Mintondefeated an attempt by a large cosmetics company to prevent our client from selling a critical product line.  The court denied plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction and the plaintiff ended up paying our client to settle the case. 

In a binding arbitration before the American Arbitration Association, Bill Gutierrez successfully defended a general contractor against breach of contract and project abandonment claims arising out of a parking garage construction project, and prevailed on the client’s counter-claim for wrongful termination.  

After several weeks of trial in San Francisco Superior Court, Bob Bleicher obtained a judgment for a major construction company on a claim for additional compensation based on promissory estoppel.   In other cases, he successfully represented the parent company of a global engineering, construction and project management company in the resolution of a $175 million claim involving complex issues of vicarious liability in connection with a major construction project in California and obtained summary judgment in a severe traumatic brain injury claim on behalf of a major hydraulic equipment manufacturer. 

Lori Lutzker and Mark Hudak represented a professional partnership which sought a declaration from the Santa Clara Superior Court regarding the duration of a royalty provision in the partnership agreement.  The defendant asserted a claim for millions in damages.  At trial, the judge ruled in favor of our client on all issues relating to the royalty payment and the defendant abandoned any claims to further compensation.  

In probate litigation in San Mateo Superior Court, a father’s estate plan was challenged by our client’s brother.  He claimed our client unduly influenced her father and that their father lacked the capacity to make the estate plan.  Keith Bartel and Lori Lutzker won the case on a motion for summary judgment, relieving our client of the burden of having to go through an extended trial.

In a court trial in San Francisco, Mark Hudak successfully defended our supermarket chain client against claims of breach of lease. 

We have had equal success in the appellate courts.  In one case, the plaintiff in a failed real estate transaction appealed a decision in its favor for $490,000, seeking millions more.  We were retained to represent the defendant in the appeal.  Not only did Mark Hudak and Lori Lutzker persuade the Sixth Appellate District not to increase the award, our cross-appeal convinced the court that the plaintiff should not have won in the first place.  The Appellate Court reversed the judgment and awarded our client its attorneys’ fees. 

In another appellate matter, Keith Bartel secured a published opinion from the California Court of Appeals affirming the lower court’s decision on a case of first impression regarding a trustee’s non-waivable duty to provide information to beneficiaries even when the trust document excused the trustee from the obligation to report to the beneficiaries. 

Let us be your advocate.  You won’t be disappointed.