Blog Home

Tag: Attorney-Client Conspiracy

July 11, 2016

ESG Capital Partners, LP v. Stratos, 828 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2016)

Posted by: jab | Share | Comments Off on ESG Capital Partners, LP v. Stratos, 828 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2016)

Download Publication The Ninth Circuit holds an attorney can be liable under securities laws and common law torts if he goes beyond his proper role, and actively participates in the client’s fraud. ESG Capital Partners, L.P. (“ESG”) was a group of investors formed to purchase pre-Initial Public Offering Facebook shares. Timothy Burns, ESG‘s managing agent, […]

Tags: , , , ,
Categories: Legal Updates

June 30, 2015

Klotz v. Milbank Tweed (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1339

Posted by: jab | Share | Comments Off on Klotz v. Milbank Tweed (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1339

Download Publication  The Second District holds the pre-filing gatekeeping statute against civil conspiracy claims alleging an attorney conspired with a client applied to bar non-client claims against an attorney. Adam Klotz, Richard Spitz, and Stephen Bruce formed SageMill LLC (SageMill) to craft tailored, short-term investment strategies and provide investment advice. SageMill’s operating agreement provided a […]

Tags:
Categories: Legal Updates

December 18, 2013

Stueve Bros. Farms, LLC v. Berger Kahn (2013) 222 Cal.App.4th 327

Posted by: jab | Share | Comments Off on Stueve Bros. Farms, LLC v. Berger Kahn (2013) 222 Cal.App.4th 327

Download Publication The Fourth District held the attorney-client conspiracy gatekeeper statute, CCP §1714.10, does not apply to an embezzlement claim. Attorneys Raymond Novell, a longtime Stueve family friend, and Jay Wayne Allen were accused of siphoning the Stueve family fortune through a Pandora’s box of wrongdoing. The Stuvees alleged causes of action for intentional misrepresentation, […]

Tags:
Categories: Legal Updates

October 11, 2013

Zealous Advocacy Loses Ground

Posted by: jab | Share | Comments Off on Zealous Advocacy Loses Ground

(Reprinted from the Los Angeles – San Francisco Daily Journal, October 11, 2013) Attorneys are taught to be zealous advocates for their clients. With rare exception, an attorney’s zealous advocacy should not lead to liability to third parties. Two recent state Court of Appeal decisions demonstrate that the line between zealous advocacy and actionable attorney […]

Tags: , , ,
Categories: Legal Updates

January 16, 2013

Rickley v. Goodfriend (2013) 212 Cal.App.4th 1136 (rev. denied April 10, 2013)

Posted by: jab | Share | Comments Off on Rickley v. Goodfriend (2013) 212 Cal.App.4th 1136 (rev. denied April 10, 2013)

Download Publication The Second District holds over a strong dissent an attorney-client conspiracy was properly alleged.  The attorneys owed independent legal duties to the plaintiffs, and thus claims were not precluded by the agent’s immunity rule.  The litigation privilege did not apply, because the communications and affirmative misconduct of the attorneys interfered with the abatement […]

Tags: , ,
Categories: Legal Updates

September 3, 2010

Favila v. Katten Muchin Rosenman, LLP (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 189

Posted by: jab | Share | Comments Off on Favila v. Katten Muchin Rosenman, LLP (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 189

Download Publication The Fourth District holds that attorneys who participate in fraudulent misrepresentations violate an independent duty and may be held liable for conspiracy with their client.  A shareholder derivative action may be precluded by the attorney-client privilege, but courts need to carefully examine questions of waiver and should not dismiss an action when it […]

Tags: , , ,
Categories: Legal Updates

November 28, 2007

Panoutsopoulos v. Chambliss (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 297

Posted by: jab | Share | Comments Off on Panoutsopoulos v. Chambliss (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 297

Download Publication The First District holds that allegations of attorney conduct that are consistent with the performance of proper legal services for a client do not state a valid cause of action for an attorney-client civil conspiracy. Nicholas and Ekaterine Panoutsopoulos entered into a lease agreement with George and Mary Karsant to lease a portion […]

Tags:
Categories: Legal Updates

July 29, 2005

Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Sherwood Partners, Inc. (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 802

Posted by: jab | Share | Comments Off on Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Sherwood Partners, Inc. (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 802

Download Publication In the context of a claim of attorney-client conspiracy, the Sixth District holds that an attorney for an assignee for the benefit of creditors owes no duty to a creditor. After Berg settled a dispute with Pluris Inc. it assigned its assets to Sherwood for the benefit of its creditors.  Sulmeyer represented Sherwood when […]

Tags: ,
Categories: Legal Updates