December, 2008: Trial Victory for General Contractor
The firm, through trial counsel Catherine Adams, recently won a trial in Los Angeles Superior Court. The litigation concerned the breach of a homeowner's contract with our client, a well-respected general contractor, for its work in building a high-end luxury residence in the Hollywood Hills. After being sued for nonpayment, the homeowner cross-complained, and also named the contractor's surety, which was also represented by Baker & Associates.
On the first day of trial, the owner refused to offer any money to settle the case. After a three week trial, the contractor prevailed on every cause of action in its complaint, including breach of contract, foreclosure of its mechanic's lien and statutory wrongful withhold.
The jury found that the homeowner had breached the contract, and awarded the entire amount claimed by the contractor. The court then awarded prejudgment interest, costs, penalties under the wrongful withhold statute and attorney's fees under that statute to the contractor, rounding out a complete victory for our client
February, 2008: Favorable Settlement for Automobile Dealership
The firm, through Catherine Adams, represented a large automobile dealership in an action for fraud, negligent misrepresentation and violation of the CLRA by two purchasers of a vehicle.. The purchaser's counsel, a well known "lemon law expert", alleged that they asked for and were promised a factory-installed GPS system in the vehicle, and that an inferior after market system was installed.
The dealership, without admitting fault, immediately offered a replacement vehicle, which offer was rejected by the purchasers because it did not include payment of any attorney fees.
After extensive discovery, it was determined that the plaintiffs not have proof that the initial notice required by the CLRA was received by the dealership by certified mail. Both sides filed motions in limine on that issue, with Baker & Associates contending plaintiffs should not be permitted to assert their CLRA cause of action. After the parties answered ready for trial, the court held a settlement conference. After two days, the case settled for the originally offered replacement vehicle, the parties agreeing to reserve the issue of whether the purchasers were entitled to over $100,000.00 in attorney's fees for a motion. The court denied the purchaser's motion for attorney's fees.
Decisive Win Against LAUSD 2007.
The firm won a long and heated battle against Los Angeles Unified School District. The case represented the first appellate court pronouncement on the subject of lost profits damages since the 2004 California Supreme decision in Lewis Jorge Construction Management, Inc. v. Pomona Unified School Dist., and concerned a dispute between our client, a public works contractor, and LAUSD over a school construction project. Contractor claimed they had been wrongfully terminated from the project and not allowed to complete their work. LAUSD claimed that contractor had breached the parties' contract and had not adequately responded to a "Three-day Notice to Proceed". In November, 2004, after a two-week trial in Los Angeles Superior Court, the jury returned an 11-1 verdict overwhelmingly in favor of our client, awarding them $954,197.00 in damages to LAUSD's award of just $1.00. The trial judge, William F. Fahey, commented later:
"The case was hotly litigated, very competently litigated."
In spite of Judge Fahey's comments, LAUSD appealed. Their appeal was rejected in the August 29 decision, that was initially certified for partial publication. As recognized by the jury, trial judge and Court of Appeal, the firm was able to distinguish the case from the Lewis Jorge case, and successfully proved lost profits as an element of damages. LAUSD's Petition for Rehearing was also summarily rejected by the Court of Appeal. Ultimately, the California Supreme Court de-published the case since it represented a significant threat to public entities. LAUSD finally satisfied the judgment, paying over $1.2 million to our client.
Arbitration victory
In an arbitration matter, after six full days of hearings, the firm was successful in securing an award in the amount of $223,948.96 on behalf of a general contractor who performed a substantial remodel of a commercial building in Huntington Beach, CA. The arbitrator rejected the owner's claims of improper and untimely performance, and found that our client was entitled to all unpaid sums for labor, equipment and material supplied to the project, damages for increased job costs and overhead due to owner-caused delays, and attorney fees and arbitration costs.
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.
Attorney Jonathan E. Dekel speaks Hebrew.
Copyright © 2010 by BAKER & ASSOCIATES. All rights reserved. You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution. All copies must include this copyright statement.