Glenn T. Barger, Esq.

• A wrongful death action filed by the surviving wife and two adult children of the decedent who was driving an 18-wheel truck when he was rear-ended by another truck, which then caused him to rear-end a third truck. He initially complained of back and head issues. However, within a month, he began complaining of severe depression, paranoia and other psychological issues. He was diagnosed with PTSD and approximately 6 months later he committed suicide. There was no evidence of pre-existing psychological issues. The issue was whether the plaintiff could prove causation that the accident caused the decedent to commit suicide and specifically if it led to an ‘irresistible impulse’ to commit suicide. The third truck driver also filed an action which was previously settled separately despite a joint policy limit demand by all of the plaintiffs. As a result, there were also coverage issues.
• A personal injury matter arising out of an automobile accident where the defendant failed to yield to traffic. The plaintiff alleged mild TBI and PTSD resulting in dizziness, headaches, memory loss, back injuries and resulting loss of earnings. Liability was not disputed. However, the defense disputed the alleged injuries and damages.
• An automobile/motorcycle accident where the defendant vehicle crossed over from the carpool lane thereby colliding with the plaintiff’s motorcycle. The entire incident was captured on videotape. The plaintiff made a policy limit demand for knee, shoulder and ankle injuries. The defense disputed the nature and extent of the injuries.
• A personal injury matter arising out of an automobile accident involving a ride sharing company. The plaintiff alleged severe personal injuries after the defendant dropped his passenger and made a u-turn, thereby colliding with the plaintiff’s vehicle. The defense claimed the plaintiff struck the defendant’s vehicle and also claimed that the injuries were all pre-existing.
• A personal injury matter arising out of an automobile accident involving a ride sharing company. The plaintiff claimed the defendant driver intentionally backed over him after he exited the vehicle causing severe orthopedic injuries. The defense claimed the plaintiff fabricated the story, was an extremely aggressive passenger causing the driver to report the incident to the police and claimed the injuries were all pre-existing.

• A trip and fall matter where the plaintiff alleged that she tripped on standard rubber/carpet mat at a grocery store causing her severe injuries. The defendant disputed that they had notice, disputed that there was a dangerous condition, alleged comparative fault and disputed the nature and extent of the injuries.
• A slip and fall incident at a now bankrupt department store. The plaintiff claimed she tripped and fell over a hangar left on the floor thereby suffering back and neck injuries. The defense disputed liability based on notice and disputed the nature and extent of the injuries.
• A matter arising out of a trip and fall down a stairway at a high-rise commercial building, resulting in a fractured nose, neck, back, knee and ankle injuries. Plaintiff underwent nasal surgery and contended that she would need fusion surgery among other treatments for her injuries. The defense disputed liability, and claimed there had been no prior incidents and there were no code violations on the stairs. They also claimed at a minimum there was significant comparative fault. They also disputed that plaintiff would require back surgery and argued that the plaintiff’s back conditions were pre-existing.
• A personal injury matter arising out of an automobile accident involving a ride sharing company. The plaintiff claimed the defendant made an illegal turn in front of the defendant causing her severe orthopedic injuries resulting in injections and surgery. Liability was not disputed. The defense claimed pre-existing injuries and that the minimal impact did not cause plaintiff injuries.
• A personal injury matter arising out of an automobile accident involving a ride sharing company. The plaintiff, who was an anesthesiologist, claimed severe TBI after being rear-ended by an underinsured motorist while a passenger in a ride sharing vehicle. As a result, plaintiff claimed severe personal injuries and loss of earnings. The defendant disputed the nature and extent of the injuries and claimed that instead the plaintiff suffered from pre-existing vertigo and alcoholism.
• The plaintiff in a bodily injury matter alleged that a dangerous condition existed in a holding room set up at a church during the filming of a tv show. The plaintiff was 84 years old at the time of the incident and she did not see a step on a stage and fell, which caused her to fracture her hip. She also alleged that her Alzheimer’s condition worsened as a result of the fall. The defense disputed they had notice of a dangerous condition, that a dangerous condition existed, denied causation related to Alzheimer’s, set forth a Special Employer defense and disputed the total damages including the lifecare plan issues.
• The plaintiff in a bodily injury matter alleged that a swinging gate at the entry to a pizza restaurant caused him to suffer an injury to his foot. He initially did not seek treatment and the injury ultimately became infected which led to significant injuries and damages. He also claimed loss of earnings. The defense disputed notice and that the gate constituted a dangerous condition. They also claimed the plaintiff failed to mitigate his damages by failing to seek treatment.
• The plaintiff in a bodily injury matter claimed that he suffered personal injuries to his neck, back and shoulder as a result of a rear-end automobile collision. The defense did not dispute liability, but did dispute the nature and extent of the plaintiff's alleged injuries.
• A matter arising out of the sexual abuse of a 14-year-old girl by a male employee of a school who was 19 years old at the time of the incident. The male pled guilty to a felony. The plaintiff alleged severe emotional distress, including Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. The defense disputed liability based on notice issues and also disputed the nature and extent of the alleged damages.
• A matter arising out of an undisputed sexual assault at a medical facility. The plaintiff was working as a housekeeper when she was sexually assaulted by a security guard employed by the facility. The security guard pled guilty to the criminal charges related to this incident. The plaintiff alleged the facility was responsible for this incident based upon negligent hiring, supervision and training, including prior notice issues related to the security guard. As a result, of the incident the plaintiff alleged she suffered severe emotional distress issues. The defendant disputed they were on notice of issues related to the guard and disputed the nature and extent of the plaintiff's injuries and damages.
• Plaintiff alleged she slipped and fell on juice spilled by another customer at a fast food restaurant. As a result of the fall, she alleged severe personal injuries, including neck and back injuries resulting in surgery. The defendant disputed that they had notice of a dangerous condition, alleged comparative fault and disputed the injuries and damages.
• An accident arising out of an automobile causing a collision with a city bus. Six passengers, including the bus driver, sued the driver of the vehicle for various personal injuries. Liability was admitted. Certain alleged injuries and damages were disputed. However, the driver of the vehicle only had a small policy of insurance. As a result, all 6 plaintiffs needed to ultimately agree to an allocation of the insurance policy or the matter could not be resolved.
• A bodily injury matter arising out of an admitted rear-end automobile accident. However, the defendant disputed that the accident caused the plaintiff's injuries or in the alternative disputed the nature and extent of the alleged injuries and damages. The plaintiff claimed cervical, shoulder and lower back injuries.
• Plaintiff was the dad and guardian ad litem for an eight-year-old girl that was sexually abused while at a birthday party at a rock-climbing facility by one of the workers. The claims included negligent hiring and supervision. The worker pled guilty to criminal charges arising out of the incident. The defendant contended that it had no notice of any issues with the worker and it could not have prevented the incident.
• Plaintiff was rear ended while stopped at a stop sign at the end of a freeway exit ramp by the defendant. Plaintiff claimed severe injuries to his neck, including future damages for surgery.
• Plaintiff claimed that while she was jogging on a public sidewalk, she tripped and fell on a rise in the sidewalk, which constituted a dangerous condition and caused her to suffer severe injuries. Defendant claimed they had no notice of the rise and that the rise was not a dangerous condition and at best a trivial defect. The defense also disputed the plaintiff’s alleged injuries and damages.
• Plaintiff claimed he suffered personal injuries, including herniated cervical and lower back discs, resulting in alleged damages for past and future medical treatment and loss of earnings. Specifically, he claimed that the owner of his apartment building retained an HVAC subcontractor who in turn retained a crane service to place a condenser unit on the roof of his building. As a result of this work, he claimed that the condenser unit was either dropped on the roof or the workers installing the HVAC system caused a hatch to the roof, including the frame, to fall down on him in his unit. Each of the defendants disputed liability, including the owner who claimed a Privette defense and placed responsibility on the HVAC contractor, the HVAC contractor denied that his workers caused the roof hatch to fall and the crane company denied it dropped the unit on the roof. They all disputed any duty to warn and/or cordon off the area below where they were working. The matter was ultimately resolved globally, including a mutual release and dismissals of the Complaint and all Cross-Complaints.
• Alleged sexual abuse at a public school involving a minor.
• An admitted liability commercial truck v. automobile matter.
• An uninsured motorist case where the plaintiff suffered back and neck injuries arising from an automobile accident. The plaintiff underwent multiple pain management injections and ultimately a laminectomy. Liability was not disputed. The defense instead disputed the nature and extent of the injuries, the reasonable value of the medical bills and the total alleged damages. A previous mediation before another mediator was unsuccessful.
• A personal injury matter arising out of a slip and fall at a grocery store. The plaintiff alleged she slipped and fell on liquid in the freezer aisle of a grocery store, that the polished concrete floor was inherently dangerous, and that the defendant failed to properly train their employees to maintain the floor and specifically did not comply with their own maintenance manual. As a result, the plaintiff suffered severe back, neck, and knee injuries. The defense disputed liability, including that the floor was inherently dangerous and/or that they failed to maintain the floor or train their employees. They also claimed the plaintiff suffered from pre-existing injuries and disputed the nature and extend of the damages.
• A bodily injury/Federal Maritime Act matter arising out of two separate incidents which occurred in the course and scope of the plaintiff’s employment on the docks in the Los Angeles harbor. Plaintiff claimed he suffered severe personal injuries to his lower back and neck and related loss of past and future earnings.
• A bodily injury matter arising out of an automobile accident. The defendant did not dispute liability, but instead disputed the nature and extent of the injuries and damages and specifically that all of the injuries were pre-existing.
• Plaintiff fell off the back of a golf cart while touring Defendant’s apartment complex.
• Slip and fall near pumps at gas station including failure to maintain and notice issues involving soft tissue injuries, a fractured leg and loss of earnings.
• Trip and fall at gas station including involving unmarked step involving herniated disc injury and loss of earnings.
• Trip and fall at gas station involving cracks in the concrete and herniated disc injury, surgery, future surgeries and loss of earnings.
• Trip and fall in a commercial parking lot involving lighting issues and trip hazard and herniated cervical disc injury.
• Slip and fall on private hiking trail at a condominium complex involving fractured ankle.
• Slip and fall inside gas station involving leaking soda machine and back/neck injuries and TBI claim.
• Slip and fall inside public bathroom on private property.
• Commercial truck sideswipe of automobile involving soft tissue injuries and loss of earnings.
• Commercial truck collision ending in truck rolling over on top of automobile resulting in TBI, multiple back surgeries and psych issues.
• Wrongful death at apartment complex involving negligent security.
• Wrongful death in commercial parking lot involving negligent security.
• Stabbing in locker room at spa facility involving negligent security.
• Auto and pedestrian accident in cross-walk involving TBI and fractures.
• Motorcycle and skateboarder collision outside of cross-walk involving a minor including fractured arm and disfigurement issues.
• Burn case involving severe scarring.
• Food poisoning matter at grocery store involving F.D.A. issues and requirements.
• Food poisoning at restaurant.
• Trip and fall at intersection of grass, sidewalk and sprinkler cut-out involving back surgery and loss of earnings.
• Slip and fall on sidewalk related to ponding water at apartment complex involving back and cervical injuries.
• Severe brain injury on driving range at public golf course involving a minor.
• Trip and fall on stairs involving code violations related to rise and run issues.
• Slip and fall inside grocery store involving coefficient of friction issues related to waxing of the floors involving fractured leg and soft tissue issues.
• Slip and fall inside grocery store involving notice and failure to maintain issues and soft tissue injuries.
• Product liability matter involving severe injuries related to a propane tank.
• Product liability matter involving food and drinks.
• Bodily injury matter involving elevator issue.
• Dog bite cases.
• Multiple Landlord/tenant disputes involving vermin, rats, bed bugs and rent control issues.
• Multiple bodily injury matters arising out of exposure to mold.
• Assault and battery claim involving negligent security and premises liability issues.
• Indoor pollution issue involving tight building syndrome.
• Bodily injury related to asbestos exposure, drycleaners and underground tanks.
• Broken teeth matters involving restaurants.
• Assault and battery and alleged improper security and alcohol issues at bar.
• Significant experience with express, equitable and implied indemnity, contribution and declaratory relief related to bodily injury and property damage claims, including allocation issues in admitted liability matters between co-defendants.

view all

• A matter arising out of the construction of a hotel. The general contractor filed a breach of contract/delay claim against one of its subcontractors alleging that they needed to supplement the work of the subcontractor and ultimately replace the subcontractor, causing it to incur 7 figure damages, including liquidated damages owed to the owner for delay. The action also included significant coverage disputes, which were mediated as part of the settlement.
• Plaintiff general contractor claimed defendant homeowner failed to pay for remodeling work performed at the defendant’s home. The defendant homeowner contended that the work was defective and had yet to be completed.
• Plaintiff subcontractor and the general contractor sued the defendant property owner for breach of contract and to enforce a mechanics lien for failure to pay for their work during the new construction of a single-family home. The defendant claimed the subcontractor and general contractor overcharged for the work, caused delay to the project and the work was defective, and therefore disputed any monies were owed and sought additional damages.
• Plaintiff, a website constructor, contended that defendant, an online beauty supply company, failed to pay for work plaintiff performed creating the defendant’s website. The defendant contended that they were overcharged and the website took too long to construct and did not meet the basic requirements for online sales, and as a result defendant suffered damages in excess of the amount owed, seeking recovery from the plaintiff.
• Multiple subrogation matters arising out of product issues and property damage related to stoves, refrigerators, grills, plumbing lines and fixtures.

• Multiple inverse condemnation matters involving fires, slope failure and flooding.
• A breach of contract and delay arising out of construction matter, which arose out of the ground up, new construction of a hotel in Orange County. The owner claimed liquidated damages as a result of delay in the completion of the project. The general contractor claimed they were owed money for their work on the project and disputed the delay claim. In addition, 4 subcontractors had filed individual lien/breach of contract actions against the general contractor for monies owed. In response, the general contractor disputed the amounts owed and had filed cross-complaints related to the owner’s delay and liquidated damage claims.
• Multiple Breach of Contract claims between businesses arising out of alleged failure to pay for manufactured goods.
• Multiple Breach of Contract claims between an individual and a business arising out of alleged failure to pay for services rendered and alleged misrepresentations and misappropriation of funds were at issue.
• Business dispute arising out of alleged material breach of the contract and the defense of wrongful termination.
• Trade secret and unfair competition matters.
• Failure to pay third party referral fees and alleged misappropriation of funds.
• Plaintiff alleged Defendant breached its contract by failing to pay over $5 million in fees and incentives related to an investment banking agreement wherein Plaintiff was retained to find funding for a condominium project in Mexico. Defendant cross-complained for fraud and rescission related to the same contract.
• An insurance coverage/bad faith action filed by a homeowner against her insurance carrier in which the insured homeowner plaintiff’s home was burglarized and she made a claim for stolen personal property and damage to the flooring at the home as a result of the burglary. The carrier denied coverage for the personal property pursuant to the forced entry requirement in the policy and disputed the amount the insured was entitled to for the property damage. The defense also contended the claim was fraudulent. The plaintiff also sought punitive damages.
• Coverage disputes involving duty to defend, time on risk and policy exclusions.
• Duty to defend matters related to additional insured endorsements.
• Matters involving alleged bad faith.

view all

• A complex real estate matter that arose out of the multi-million-dollar purchase of four commercial properties in the South Bay area of Los Angeles. The plaintiff buyer claimed the defendant seller breached the Purchase and Sale Agreement by failing to, among other issues, remove a tenant’s right to first refusal to purchase one of the properties, thereby making it impossible to go forward with the purchase and causing the plaintiff to incur significant damages. The settlement ultimately involved a cash payment and options to purchase the properties once all clouds on the title were removed.
• A real estate matter arising out of the sale of a home which the defendant purchased, remodeled, and then sold shortly thereafter. The plaintiff claimed fraud and breach of contract including allegations that the defendant failed to disclose material defects at the home, concealed defects, and did not properly fill out the TDS forms as part of the sale of the home. The matter also involved alleged issues related to the standard California Association of Realtors form which was used to sell the home.
• An action involving the alleged breach of a leasing agreement due to the failure to maintain the common areas.
• An action involving the alleged failure to disclose lead and other environmental issues in a standard C.A.R. agreement for a “flipped” home.
• An action involving the failure to disclose grading work which had been performed by the seller on the property before new construction of a single family home.

• An action involving the breach of a commercial lease agreement based on the number of parking spots allowed on the property.
• An action involving significant security deposits and return of same.
• An action involving the standard TDS disclosures in the C.A.R. agreement arising out of the sale of a single family home.
• An action involving the failure to disclose prior repairs, water intrusion and mold arising out of the sale of a single family home.
• An action involving breach of the sale of a commercial building related to rent rolls and active tenants.
• An action involving the sale of an apartment building involving misrepresentations regarding tenants, rents and expenses.
• An action involving a commercial shopping center related to breaches of maintenance and security requirements.
• An action involving interpretation of the “as is” provision in a purchase and sale agreement.

view all

• A construction defect and fraud matter arising out of a high-end remodel project of a single-family home. The plaintiff alleged they were defrauded out of close to 7 figures for work which was either never performed and/or defectively performed. There were also alleged delay issues. The defense disputed liability and argued they were terminated before they could finish the work and lost profits, which resulted in a set off for the plaintiff’s alleged damages. There were also significant coverage issues.
• A construction defect matter arising out of the ground-up new construction of a high-end, single-family home. The homeowner plaintiff also served as the general contractor and alleged both product and installation defects related to the windows and stucco system. The subcontractor defendants disputed liability, the scope and cost of repair, and alleged the plaintiff as the general contractor had significant comparative fault.
• A construction defect matter involving a very complex manufacturing plant of an algae-based extract which was used in food products. The issues arose out of the use of a muriatic acid to prepare the floors for epoxy coating by the flooring contractor which allegedly damaged the newly installed tanks, pumps and related stainless-steel pipes requiring complete replacement in order to avoid any future contamination issues. The defense did not dispute liability, but claimed a highly technical cleaning solution was available and would remedy the damages, including corrosion, of the tanks and pipes.
• A construction defect pre-litigation matter involving multiple high-end units in San Diego that was filed by the H.O.A. against the developer and general contractor. The alleged defects included water intrusion, decks, stucco, roofing, HVAC, and landscaping issues. The matter resolved in one mediation session without a formal action being filed.
• A matter involving alleged construction defects arising out of the demolition of an old pool and spa and the construction of a new pool, spa, deck, foundations and barbeque at a high-end home. The plaintiffs alleged the pool, spa and deck were defectively constructed which forced them to tear it all out and rebuild all of it. They also sought loss of use damages. The defense disputed that a complete removal and replacement was required and disputed the loss of use damages. The pool contractor also pursued a cross-complaint against its subcontractor and there were insurance coverage issues between the parties and their carriers.

• A construction defect matter involving 21 single-family homes and typical stucco, plumbing, roof, structural and water intrusion issues. However, the developer only had legal liability based on a prior bankruptcy finding as to a small number of the homes. As a result, the plaintiff pursued the subcontractors directly for the other homes. Settlements were achieved between the plaintiff and developer and the majority of the subcontractors and between the plaintiff and the developer. Further settlement discussions continued as to the remaining subcontractors.
• Plaintiff general contractor alleged they were entitled to unpaid retention arising out of the construction of a hotel. The defendant hotel disputed that they owed any money as they claimed the project was delayed in completion thereby entitling the owner to liquidated damages pursuant to the Prime contract, and that certain work was performed defectively and therefore required repairs in excess of the amounts owed. The owner therefore sought monies in excess of the amounts claimed by the general contractor. The general contractor had also cross-complained against the relevant subcontractors for the alleged defective work and delays.
• A construction defect matter arising out of a remodel project in the Hollywood Hills. The general contractor defendant died after completion of the project so the plaintiff homeowners pursued the matter pursuant to the Probate Code against the defendant's insurance carrier. The defendant's insurance carrier raised significant coverage defenses and also disputed the alleged defects and damages.
• Plaintiff general contractor claimed defendant homeowner failed to pay for remodeling work performed at the defendant’s home. The defendant homeowner contended that the work was defective and had yet to be completed.
• Plaintiff subcontractor and the general contractor sued the defendant property owner for breach of contract and to enforce a mechanics lien for failure to pay for their work during the new construction of a single-family home. The defendant claimed the subcontractor and general contractor overcharged for the work, caused delay to the project and the work was defective, and therefore disputed any monies were owed and sought additional damages.
• Plaintiff general contractor claimed defendant homeowner failed to pay for remodeling work performed at the defendant’s home. The defendant homeowner contended that the work was defective and had yet to be completed.
• Plaintiff subcontractor and the general contractor sued the defendant property owner for breach of contract and to enforce a mechanics lien for failure to pay for their work during the new construction of a single family home. The defendant claimed the subcontractor and general contractor overcharged for the work, caused delay to the project and the work was defective, and therefore disputed any monies were owed and sought additional damages.
• Plaintiff contended that the defendant damaged its underground utilities while performing work on the 5 freeway expansion project, including violation of the specific code requirements related to underground construction. The defendant sought indemnity from its subcontractor for failure to properly perform its work resulting in the damages to the utilities. The subcontractor contended it performed its work pursuant to the applicable plans and specifications and the defendant was solely at fault for the damages.
• A construction defect matter involving multiple single-family tract homes in Contra Costa. The plaintiffs claimed a variety of construction defects, including water intrusion issues resulting in alleged damages. The developer/general contractor defendant disputed the nature and extent of the damages. In addition to resolving the homes in the litigation, a settlement was also achieved on behalf of additional homeowners in the same project which were part of a pre-litigation, SB 800 claim. Both settlements were reached in one half day of mediation total.
• A construction defect matter arising from a remodeling project at the plaintiff’s high-end beach house. The plaintiff claimed that the remodel work performed by the general contractor and its subcontractors resulted in alleged defects, including significant framing, roof, window, and slider issues which led to the firing of the general contractor. There were also significant coverage issues for the general contractor and coverage counsel also actively participated in the mediation. The defense claimed the issues were the result of design issues and disputed the nature of the alleged defects and the scope and cost of repair.
• A breach of contract/delay claim matter arising out of a high-rise apartment building and the construction of a high-rise hotel. Both parties claimed the other breached their contract and owed the other significant alleged damages for remediation, delay and cost to repair damages as well as liquidated damages.
• A breach of contract/delay claim matter between two contractors arising out of the construction of a large retail project. One party contended that they were not paid in full for their work at the project and the other party contended that the work was not performed timely and as a result they incurred delay damages and were forced to supplement the unpaid party with a separate contractor, which resulted in charges in excess of the amounts owed. As a result, both parties sought damages from each other.
• A pre-litigation, SB 800, construction defect matter involving multiple single-family tract homes in the Central Valley. The plaintiffs claimed a variety of construction defects, including water intrusion issues resulting in alleged damages. The developer/general contractor defendant disputed the nature and extent of the damages.
• A construction defect/breach of contract matter arising out of a high end, single-family home remodel in Bel Air. The contractor contended they were owed money for its work on the project and the homeowners contended the work was performed defectively thereby entitling them to repair cost damages as well as liquidated damages in excess of the amounts owed for the work.
• Defendant retained Plaintiff to construct a new industrial warehouse. Plaintiff claimed they were constructively terminated due to defective plans and specifications and monies owed. As a result, Plaintiff sought approximately $400,000 from Defendant. Defendant claimed the Plaintiff failed to construct the building as contracted, thereby entitling them to delay damages because Plaintiff abandoned the project, and sought approximately $600,00 on its cross-complaint.
• Matter arose out of Plaintiff’s flood damage remodel at Defendant’s apartment building. Plaintiff claimed that Defendant failed to pay for the work. Defendant claimed they paid the broker Co-Defendant who arranged for the work and that the Co-Defendant should pay for the damages. The Co-Defendant also had an additional claim for monies owed by Plaintiff.
• Plaintiff contended that Defendant built a wall on their property thereby taking approximately 144 square feet of their property. Plaintiff sought to have the wall taken down and moved to the actual property line and related damages, including nuisance and trespass. Defendant contended she relied on an improper survey and sought indemnity from the Cross-Defendant land surveyor.
• Individual homeowner single family tract home matters v. Developer, General Contractor and Subcontractors involving alleged construction defects involving all aspects of construction, from below-grade to roof, including windows, stucco, sheet metal, waterproofing, finish work, landscaping, concrete, plumbing, electrical, drywall, drainage, structural and civil claims.
• H.O.A. v. Developer, General Contractor and Subcontractors related to common areas including slopes, drainage, retaining walls, athletic facilities, clubhouses, restaurants involving alleged construction defects involving all aspects of construction, from below-grade to roof, including windows, stucco, sheet metal, waterproofing, finish work, landscaping, concrete, plumbing, electrical, drywall, drainage, structural and civil claims.
• Multi-party construction defect matters arising out of shopping centers, hospitals, prisons, hotels, casinos, dormitories, schools and high rise construction projects, including loss of use, loss of revenue, attorney fee claims and waiver of subrogation issues.
• Multi-party construction defect matters arising of high rise construction projects, including mixed-use matters.
• Multi-party construction defect matters involving pool construction.
• Multi-party construction defect matters arising out of common areas including slopes, clubhouses, sports fields, bleachers, artificial turf, pools and tennis courts.
• Multi-party construction defect matters arising out of public entity construction of offices, college buildings and facilities, freeways and roads, including loss of use, loss of revenue, attorney fee claims and waiver of subrogation issues.
• Multi-party construction defect matters arising out of shoring and below grade construction issues.
• Multi-party construction defect matters arising out of high end custom and specialty home construction.
• Contract disputes during and after construction.
• Delay claims related to commercial construction.
• Course of construction issues, including mechanics liens and stop notices.
• Property line disputes between neighbors.
• Improper removal and trimming of trees on private property.
• Improper excavation issues resulting in slope failure.
• Related Special Master experience including C.M.O./Pre-Trial Order disputes, implementation, management and discovery issues.
• Multiple matters involving standard A.I.A. agreements and provisions.

view all

• A wrongful termination and sexual harassment matter where the plaintiff alleged that she was inappropriately touched, subjected to sexual comments and received graphic photographs and videos from the owner of her company, which resulted in severe emotional distress. The defense argued the relationship was consensual, that plaintiff quit on her own and that the allegations were an attempt to extort money from the defendant.
• A wage and hour /PAGA matter in which the plaintiff sought 7 figures to resolve the matter and the defense had an affirmative claim for interference with an economic relationship and trade secret violations. The alleged employment violations included failure to pay over-time, failure to provide meal breaks and regular breaks, and paycheck violations. The parties reached a confidential settlement at the mediation including a dismissal of the entire action.
• The Claimant alleged that the employer owed her (1) overtime premium wages (2) meal period premiums, (3) rest period premiums, (4) reporting time pay, and (5) reimbursable business expenses and included claims for discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination, meal and rest break violations, unpaid overtime, waiting time penalties, and non-compliant wage statements and a PAGA claim to recover civil penalties. The employer claimed Claimant performed unauthorized overtime work, systematic tardiness, despite multiple warnings and an individual counseling session, in combination with her unauthorized overtime, work led to her termination.
• Multiple DFEH discrimination claims.
• A matter involving alleged discrimination, harassment, and retaliation against Plaintiff. The defense claimed the plaintiff was not their employee as he was employed by a Staffing Company and the Staffing Company terminated his employment.

• Multiple cases involving (1) disability discrimination; (2) failure to provide reasonable accommodation; (3) failure to engage in the interactive process; (4) wrongful termination in violation of FEHA; (5) wrongful termination in violation of public policy (for reporting violations of the law); (6) retaliation in violation FEHA; and (7) retaliation in violation of public policy.
• Matters involving alleged discrimination, wrongful termination, and retaliation.
• Multiple wage and hour violation cases, including class actions.
• An employment matter arising out the alleged retaliatory termination of an assistant teacher Plaintiff claimed that she was wrongfully terminated after she complained about purported workplace safety violations and abuse/neglect of children by another teacher.

view all

• Plaintiff contended that the defendant damaged its underground utilities while performing work on the 5 freeway expansion project, including violation of the specific code requirements related to underground construction. The defendant sought indemnity from its subcontractor for failure to properly perform its work resulting in the damages to the utilities. The subcontractor contended it performed its work pursuant to the applicable plans and specifications and the defendant was solely at fault for the damages.
• A wildfire matter allegedly caused by power line issues and the failure to properly trim trees adjacent to the trigger point of the fire resulting in damage to property, including business losses. The matter involved subrogation and inverse condemnation claims and cross actions for indemnity.
• A landslide matter due to the alleged failure to maintain the slope at issue and allegations of over-watering of the adjacent property resulting in property damage, including cross claims for indemnity.
• A fire matter allegedly caused by negligent and illegal machine shop activities resulting in damage to adjacent properties, including an old car collection damaged by the fire.
• A flood case due to the alleged failure to maintain irrigation ditches, including alleged toxic exposure to chemicals from a tannery that was flooded which then spread throughout the community. The matter involved both personal injuries and property damage.

• A wildfire matter due to alleged negligent tree trimming activities, including cross actions and inverse condemnation.
• A slope failure matter due to alleged negligent grading and construction of a single family home development above the neighborhood below.
• A fire matter caused by the alleged negligent storing of flammable materials which spread to adjacent properties.
• A toxic tort/tight building syndrome matter involving alleged toxic exposure due to off gassing of construction materials, including paints and floor tiles during the remodeling of a high rise office building.
• Chinese drywall bodily injury actions arising out of the installation of allegedly toxic drywall in single family homes.
• Multiple matters involving the installation of defective pipes in multi-family homes in multiple developments, including cross actions for indemnity.
• Multiple matters involving alleged defective roof tiles in multi-family homes, including actions for indemnity.
• An anti-trust price fixing matter involving multiple restaurants.
• Multiple wage and hour class actions, including PAGA claims, related to a variety of issues, including failure to provide breaks, time clock violations and overtime claims for non-exempt employees.
• Multiple class actions for alleged construction defects in large single family home developments.
• A bodily injury/nuisance claim allegedly caused by fumes from a bleach factory to people in a neighboring community

view all

• An alleged landlord/tenant warranty of habitability matter, which arose out of alleged bedbugs, cockroaches, water intrusion, and safety issues at the plaintiff’s apartment. The plaintiff further alleged personal injuries and related damages, including statutory violations. The defendants disputed liability and damages, including the plaintiff’s right to recover attorney’s fees and punitive damages.
• Multiple landlord tenant disputes related to alleged vermin, rats and bed bugs at apartment complexes throughout southern and northern California involving individual and multiple residents.
• A landlord tenant dispute related to negligent security and safety issues arising out of an assault and battery at an apartment complex.
• Multiple matters involving wrongful evictions, including statutory claims related to rent control in southern and northern California related to family members moving into units, remodels and improvements, including attorney’s fees claims.

• Legal malpractice arising out of bodily injury matter and statute of limitation issues related to a governmental entity.
• Legal malpractice arising out of bodily injury matter regarding failure to designate proper experts.
• Legal malpractice arising out of estate planning issues.
• Legal malpractice arising out of tax return preparation.
• Legal malpractice arising out of bankruptcy filings.

• Legal malpractice arising out of failure to respond to discovery resulting in exclusion of evidence at trial.
• Malicious prosecution action after defense verdict at trial arising out of commercial media dispute including Slapp issues.
• Malicious prosecution action after defense verdict at trial arising out of real estate transaction including Slapp issues.
• Failure to disclose and misrepresentation issues arising out of sale of a single family, high end home.
• Failure to disclose and misrepresentation issues arising out of commercial property sale, including parking spaces and square footage issues.
• Improper touching incident against massage facility including negligent hiring, training and supervision and premises liability issues.
• Improper touching incident against masseuse and spa facility including premises liability issues.
• Intentional interference with economic relationship, defamation and negligence between two archeologists.
• Standard of care matters against hair salon arising out of hair dye treatment.
• Standard of care matters against dog groomers.
• Standard of care matters arising out injuries at medi-spa facilities related to injections, laser treatments and skin care.
• Standard of care issue against structural engineer related to improper calculations resulting in bridge failure leading to personal injuries and property damage.
• Standard of care issue against mechanical engineer at chemical plant.
• Multiple matters involving standard of care issues against design professionals related to alleged construction defects.
• Standard of care issues against Geotechnical Engineer related to slope failure.
• Standard of care issues against software design company related to medical bills.
• Standard of care issues against software design company at automated manufacturing facility.
• Disputes related to design, planning, permitting, approval and construction involving California Coastal Commission.
• Real Estate failure to disclose matters including claims against brokers, agents, developers and sellers.

view all