Liz Skane just obtained a dismissal for a waiver of costs after a 14 ½ week construction defect jury trial in Las Vegas, Nevada.  Plaintiff Sun Colony developed an age-restricted community within the master planned development of Summerlin called the Siena Project.  There are 575 single-family residences in the Siena Project built between 1999 and 2005.  In order to keep the homes out of litigation, co-plaintiff AIG, the excess insurer for the original builder (and the developer) paid two repair contractors, SC Wright Construction and McCormick Construction $5.1 million to repair the drywall cracking in each of the homes.  Our client, General Building Systems ("GBS") was the truss manufacturer for the project and manufactured and supplied the trusses to co-defendant KB Framers, the framing subcontractor who installed the trusses.  The main issue in this case involved a large number of ceiling cracks.  The plaintiffs' expert testified the cracks are largely perpendicular to the direction of the trusses, along drywall panel joints and the cracks occur in ceilings supported by trusses adjacent to the bottom chord splices plates.   He attributed the drywall cracking to a movement in the trusses due to the use of wet lumber in the manufacturing process.  The plaintiffs made a settlement demand to GBS and KB Framers jointly for $2.9 million.  Our client, GBS was dismissed by the plaintiffs in exchange for a waiver of costs after the close of evidence, the day before closing arguments.  As to KB Framers, the total verdict was approximately $5.75 million after the addition of attorney's fees and interest.

Just prior to the close of our client's case in a construction defect jury trial in Los Angeles, Wendy Wilcox and Sabrina Sanders settled for less than cost of defense.  Prior to trial, the plaintiff's settlement demand was $1.3 million.  This case involved an alleged flood into the plaintiff's townhome due to our client, a roofing and waterproofing contractor, inadvertently cutting a pipe while installing new rooftop balconies at the townhome complex.   The plaintiff asserted negligence and nuisance claims against our client claiming loss of use of personal and real property, living expenses for over a two-year period as well as damages to her townhome, including mold abatement.  Prior to trial, we were able to dispose of the plaintiff's punitive damages claim through a motion for summary adjudication.  At trial, we were able to show the jury that our client was not liable for all of the plaintiff's claims, particularly the mold claims.  It was in the middle of our client's case, the plaintiff offered to settle.  Following the settlement with the plaintiff, Wendy and Sabrina with their client and witnesses celebrated the victory with several of the jurors! 

Jennifer McCune recently won a huge victory in federal court for one of our collection agency clients when she defeated the plaintiff's motion to certify a class action.  Our client was sued for violations of the California and Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Acts (FDCPAs) based on the sole act of sending a collection letter to a debtor seeking payment on a second mortgage after foreclosure.  The issues at stake in this case are cutting edge issues regarding the application of California's anti-deficiency statute (CCP section 580b), whether the statute erases the mortgage debt and/or prohibits the collection of any deficiency.  These lawsuits are just now making their way in to court and we are very proud to be the first firm to defeat class certification on these issues in California!

Felicia Starr, David Eligator and Jennifer Micheri won on a motion for summary judgment in a legal malpractice securities fraud action against our client-lawyer.  The motion disposed of nine cause of action against our client seeking in excess of $1 million in damages for negligence, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, negligent misrepresentation, various securities violations, accounting and conversion.  The plaintiff, an experienced real estate investor claimed she was defrauded and her investment was a complete sham perpetrated by our client and other co-defendants.  She claimed our client, the attorney for the company in which she invested defrauded her of her entire investment.  The plaintiff further claimed our client was touted in certain subscription documents as having vast knowledge and experience in real estate, assisted in preparing documents related to her investment transaction, sat silently as the principals of the corporation made representations to plaintiff, and that he paid himself out of monies the plaintiff wire-transferred to his attorney-client trust account.  The court granted the motion for summary judgment on the grounds that: 1) no attorney-client relationship existed between the plaintiff and our client, 2) our client was not the one to make any representations upon which the plaintiff relied, 3) the plaintiff failed to establish our client promoted, sold or aided in the sale of securities or that the plaintiff purchased securities from our client, 4) the amount of damages claimed by the plaintiff was a sum certain, and thus, there is no right to an accounting, and 5) the plaintiff failed to establish fraud or that our client knew of the fraud and there is no evidence that our client converted for his own use plaintiff's investment funds.

David Eligator obtained a favorable settlement for a concrete contractor-client in a trip-and-fall case in which a 74-year-old woman suffered a potentially fatal brain injury.  Our client was a concrete contractor who was performing sidewalk repair work.  In accordance with regulations, our client blocked off the stretch of sidewalk it was repairing and directed pedestrians down a ramp into the "parking strip" of the street.   Within the path of travel, however, was a crack in the pavement with a substantial vertical offset.  The plaintiff, returning home from an evening book club event, allegedly tripped on the crack and fell and suffered a subdural hematoma, seizures, a broken nose, facial lacerations and severe bruising.  Recognizing the case presented a potential for significant exposure risk, we deployed a fast, efficient and economical strategy which included targeted discovery, an early mediation, and consistent litigation pressure.  The result was an early, favorable settlement for our client for a mere fraction of the likely exposure, with a minimum of litigation cost.

Wendy Wilcox and Felicia Starr recently achieved an extremely favorable settlement on a multi-party consolidated action involving claims of sexual harassment and wrongful termination against our restaurant/club client.  The settlement was obtained by strategically defending the action after the prior law firm's efforts faltered.  The action was filed against our client in May 2010.  In December 2010, the case was mediated unsuccessfully by the prior law firm ending with a rejected mediator's proposal of nearly $500,000.  Our firm was retained in April 2011.  With a fast approaching trial date, we swiftly began an extensive investigation revealing numerous inadequacies with the plaintiffs' case.  On the eve of the plaintiffs' depositions in July 2011, our firm settled for far less than even the cost of defense, and far below the mediator's proposal.

Michelle Schill was just awarded Outstanding San Diego Young Attorney by the Daily Transcript!  Learn more about Michelle and all of our Skane Wilcox Associates by clicking here.