The Honorable Luis A. Rodriguez brought to his civil courtroom a set of unique and extraordinary trial management skills, which earned him the reputation of being a judge who is attuned to what the attorneys before him are advocating. On the bench, he was known for being fair, flexible and patient as well as focused, effective and efficient, whether in law and motion, trial or settlement. His unique abilities were recognized by the legal community, having been honored as Judge of the Year by the Orange County Bar Association’s Business Litigation Section in 2011.

Since retiring from the bench in 2014, Judge Rodriguez has taken the expertise gained from his 34-year legal career, including 20 years as a trial judge, and applied those skills to his mediation and arbitration practice to help litigants resolve disputes. He has arbitrated cases and rendered awards in employment, including wage & hourly and FEHA claims, real estate, business, and insurance disputes. He has resolved over 100 cases through mediation, achieving a substantial rate of settlement.

Judge Rodriguez continues to strengthen his skills in mediation and arbitration by participating in numerous continuing education conferences and training programs. He most recently attended the American Bar Association Institute for Mediation.

Judge Rodriguez is available to conduct hearings remotely via secure videoconferencing. He has attended numerous webinars and training programs on how to best leverage the technology offered by Zoom, and how to best achieve resolution via a virtual platform.

Judge Rodriguez is renowned for being a judge who embraces complex legal issues. One article about him said, “Not many judges can examine an expert witness, off the cuff, about covalent ions. Orange County Superior Court Judge Luis A. Rodriguez can and did.” This is the inquisitive mind that distinguishes him. He seeks to understand and engage while at the same time keeping focus on the goal to resolve the legal issues. He has continued this in his mediation practice, successfully meshing his substantial legal experience with his passion for problem solving. Using this approach, Judge Rodriguez has amassed a successful settlement record.

Judge Rodriguez’s thirst for knowledge has been a hallmark of his professional life. He initially majored in Biology at the University of California at San Diego. In his judicial career, he used this science background to engage in projects that sought to integrate science in the law. For example, he participated in the Science and Law committee of the courts. In that capacity, he participated in a education program partnering with distinguished legal scholars creating an innovative program discussing pros and cons of using Neuroscience Evidence in the Courtroom, entitled “The Brain on Trial” presented at science and neuroscience conferences. “Brain on Trial” is accessible through the following link:

Business-minded Solutions
Judge Rodriguez has developed significant expertise in resolving commercial litigation issues with business-minded solutions. Using his science background, Judge Rodriguez founded a creative and innovative company in his native Costa Rica, which sourced unique health and wellness products from American and European Manufacturers. This company was sold in 2015. With this entrepreneural venture, he brings to his practice a “real world view” adding value to his successful career in public law and on the bench, which he employs in mediating complicated business disputes.

Areas of Expertise

  • Personal Injury
  • Business
  • Real Estate
  • Employment
  • Insurance Coverage & Bad Faith
  • Public Entities Issues (including CEQA & Condemnation)

Legal Experience

  • 1994 – 2014  Judge, Orange County Superior Court
    • General Civil Trials, Criminal, and Juvenile
    • Served on North County Municipal Court before Unification (1994 – 1998)
  • 1989 – 1994  Senior Assistant City Attorney, City of Orange
  • 1983 – 1989  Deputy City Attorney, City of Santa Ana
  • 1980 – 1983  Private Civil Practice

Education & ADR Training

  • 2016  USC-JAMS Arbitration Institute Advanced Arbitration Academy
  • 2004  Straus Institute – Pepperdine School of Law, Mediation: The Art of Facilitating Settlement
  • 1980  University of California at Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law, J.D.
  • 1977  University of California at San Diego, B.A.


  • 2011  Judge of the Year, Orange County Bar Association Business Litigation Section
  • 2004  Award & Appreciation, South Orange County Bar Association
  • 1998  Ambassador of Peace Award, Orange County Violence Prevention Coalition

Educational Activities and Accomplishments

Judge Rodriguez has authored numerous articles. Among his accomplishments, he is especially gratified with the authoring of an exceptional manual on the Individual Disabilities Education Act circulated to Juvenile courts during his tenure on the court.


Judge Rodriguez has presented numerous CJER education programs dealing with subjects in Civil and Criminal law. Since retiring, Judge Rodriguez has continued developing MCLE-accredited programs for attorneys discussing the admissibility of scientific evidence in the courtroom, and the judge’s role in dealing with attorney substance abuse presented at the 2015 and 2016 state bar conferences.

Professional Affiliations

  • California Lawyers Association
  • California Judges’ Association
  • Orange County Trial Lawyers Association
  • Association of Business Trial Lawyers, Orange County Chapter
  • Orange County Bar Association
  • Orange County Hispanic Bar Association


Judge Rodriguez was born in Costa Rica and is fluent in Spanish.

Representative Cases


  • Arbitrated a matter as part of mass arbitration filing involving claimant consumers of an online food ordering and delivery platform, with claims alleging racial discrimination stemming from a promotional policy.


  • Contract dispute for non-payment for services provided by branding and business consultants. Dispute issues were scope of work and performance.
  • Contract dispute between tax consultant and company shareholder who received tax benefits but failed to pay fee based on percentage of tax savings.
  • The case involved claim by beneficiary of deceased ex- spouse for life insurance benefits against life insurer. Life insurer and retired financial advisor defended the claim contending the life insurance had lapsed for non-payment of premiums. Plaintiff beneficiary countered saying that he did not get notice from advisor of non-payments.
  • This is in the case of Commercial Dispute between lenders relating to credit lines of successor homeowners. The borrowers lender claimed that the prior bank with the DOT sale of the property failed to close the prior credit line. The central issue is whether the borrowers were obligated under the loan agreements to pay the initial lending entity the line of credit payments claimed by the subsequent lender under section 2941 et seq. of the Civil code.
  • Business litigation between partners of a restaurant over the operating agreement provisions relating to r control and contribution obligations of the partners. A further issue of dissolution was part of the dispute between the partners.
  • Complex commercial case over the proper compensation under operating agreement for one of the prior owner’s contribution in starting and operating the company. The defendant responded that it had compensated the plaintiff for the sweat equity that plaintiff had provided.
  • Dispute over a purchase and sale of assets agreement relating to a home health care company. After making the first installment payment of $50,000 buyer suspended further payments. Buyers claim against the seller related to fraud, misrepresentation, and contract breaches which included inadequate financial disclosures, and mismanagement by former owners.
  • A suit brought to enforce a promissory note by investment advisor as part of investment advisor agreement litigation which sought fraud and misrepresentation damages against investment advisor acting as exclusive representative of company in seeking to increase share value thru the relations of investment advisor in the financial, and investor community.
  • A claim brought by national restaurant chain over a fire at one of their restaurants while remodeling. The claim involved both negligence and contract against a general and his subcontractors who worked on the renovation along with the chain’s agent. The key issue in the dispute was the liability to the sub-contractors under the indemnity provisions of the general contractor.
  • Commercial dispute between owner of carwash, distributor of carwash system and manufacturer. Plaintiff owner sued independent distributor for breach of warranties and contract claiming that car wash system purchased did not work as represented. Distributor counterclaimed against manufacturer that changes had been made on system unknown to independent distributor when it purchased the car wash system for purposes of resale to plaintiff carwash owner.
  • Complex commercial case involving the enforcement of a commissions obligation under the California Independent Wholesale Sales Representative Act. Plaintiff acted as independent wholesale agent with manufacturer of new technology product under a commission sales agreement. The claim by plaintiff is that after making sales for defendant company it refused to pay sufficient commissions for the sales claiming plaintiff had technically violated their agreement.
  • Commercial dispute between food company and its manufacturer claiming breach of the parties’ co-pack agreement. This agreement required the manufacturer to provide to food company their products in a timely manner and in sufficient quantities to fill orders of the food company customers. The food company plaintiff alleged that the manufacturer had failed to perform forcing food company to incur substantial cost to deliver its products to its customers.
  • Dispute brought under Federal Collection Practices for harassment, intimidation and other illegal practices against borrower from motor vehicle finance company.
  • Complex business dispute involving a secondary insurance market company and its investors and managers. The dispute involved the claim of former business partner in company that he was wrongfully denied fair value for his interest when the other partners ousted him as director claiming breach of fiduciary duties as well as mismanagement.
  • Complex commercial dispute between family owned entities and family shareholders and directors. The entities and family members sued for breach of fiduciary duties, and trademark infringement. In addition, separate actions were brought as derivative shareholder actions. The parties filed a total of 6 lawsuits in both state and federal court.
  • A derivative law suit between co-owners of restaurants over claims relating to breach of fiduciary duties and mismanagement of the company. In response personal counter claims by co-owner for defamation and recission of the share purchase agreement between them.
  • Combined federal trademark and operating agreement dispute between majority shareholders against minority owner of restaurant business. The dispute involves claims by minority shareholder that majority owners are seeking to deprive him of contributions and access to financial records. Majority counter claims that Minority shareholder is seeking to usurp trademark and other intellectual property after selling them to majority and company.
  • Suit brought by investor in medical device start up venture to recover $495,000 in capital loan based on misrepresentations regarding the regulatory approvals that had been applied.
  • A suit brought by marketing data company against former employee for misappropriating trade secrets and breaching of confidentiality agreement by taking contact data base which also included customer accounts and product purchases history.
  • Following a reverse merger between two holding companies in which the subject of the merger was through the acquisition of stock. The issue in the merger stemmed from allegations that the assets and liabilities were misrepresented and that the acquiring company based on this conduct was entitled to indemnity against the shareholder and principles of the acquired company.
  • Action by claimed defrauded investor in Chinese technology company against company parent for investment representations made by purported agent of company under the theory of Ostensable authority.
  • Numerous cases arising from claims relating to any number of different contract breaches between partners, companies, or individuals.

view all


  • Claims for elder abuse and wrongful death brought by the estate of resident who fell while in an elder care facility and died as a result.


  • Claims for wrongful termination, retaliation, FEHA alleging race discrimination by a medical group brought by nurse practitioner employed by the group.
  • Wage and hour litigation with both individual and PAGA claims.
  • Settled a claim of wrongful termination of shareholder doctor in medical corporation. Direct claims were also accompanied by derivative claims against directors and fellow shareholders for improper self-dealing.
  • Multiple claims of consolidated 3 former employees claiming wage violations and unsafe working conditions leading to constructive terminations by employer.
  • Employment dispute involving claim of misclassification that former cosmetologist treated as individual contractor was actually not – who claimed constructive discharge and wage and hour violations.
  • Wage & Hour violations for 3 plaintiffs, issues of unpaid overtime and 8 other wage violations. Claims against employer. Key issues included: exemption, off-the-clock nonpayment of overtime.
  • Employment discrimination FEHA claims and worker compensation issues arising from disability claims of multiple plaintiffs who suffered work related injuries.
  • Employment discrimination FEHA claims and worker compensation issues arising from disability claims of multiple plaintiffs who suffered work related injuries.
  • This is a class action relating to claims that extermination company had failed to comply with wage and hour laws and that this conduct warranted a findings of penalties. Defendant company countered that penalties were not warranted because plaintiffs could only show minor paperwork errors in paying their former and current employees wages.
  • Class action brought against entertainment company for technical violations of California’s Fee Related Talent Service Law specifically that the defendant operated as a talent agency under the statute. Further, that they failed to comply with refund provisions, and that the term provided in membership agreement exceeded permissible statutory period.
  • Public employee dispute contending that she was denied promotion based on gender and race discrimination under FEHA. In addition she asserted that male supervisor allowed a hostile work environment then engaged in retaliation for her complaints.
  • A class action dispute between drivers who claimed to be employees of trucking company who classified them as independent contractors which would not protect them as employees under California wage and hour laws.
  • Wrongful termination and Retaliation actions against large manufacturer who claimed in after the fact inquires claimed that the terminated employees including a plant manager had committed conversion against the company. The dispute concerned also a personal services contract of the plant manager creating a separate breach of contract claiming that former CEO had ratified the significant compensation to the former plant manager which company had refused to pay.
  • An employment disability discrimination case involving also reasonable accommodation, good faith, retaliation and FEHA discrimination. The dispute centered on the claim that a sleeping disorder precluded the employee from receiving a reasonable accommodation for her claimed medical condition. Consequently, the employee also claimed that the employer retaliated and discriminated against the employee based on the claimed disability she was terminated from her employment. The Employer claimed that the actions taken which led to employee’s termination were separate motivated by specific business reasons.
  • Plaintiff employee was terminated as part of work force reduction in which he and 9 other employees were terminated. Plaintiff disputed work reduction as pre-text he claimed he was included in the workforce reduction as retaliation for filing a workers compensation claim against employer.
  • Plaintiff was longtime employee with a stellar sales history. He claimed that employer wrongfully terminated because of age discrimination under FEHA. In addition, he claimed that his termination which was based on his poor performance which he disputed as pretext for his termination.
  • Plaintiff a long term employee with a known serious health condition claimed that she was discriminated based on her age and physical disability. Further, plaintiff claimed that her employer also failed to reasonably accommodate her disability as required by law. Employer countered that they did not discriminate moreover they owed no accommodation in that they believed that employee had resigned when she did not return from authorized medical leave.
  • An action brought by a waitress against a restaurant chain claiming that she was sexually harassed by her manager and wrongfully terminated for refusing his advances. Also as part of her claim were violations of various Labor Code provisions.
  • Employment claim brought by employee of a private university who had a long history of personality conflicts and disputes with supervisors. Among the claims made against her employer was that she was forced to perform another employee’s work, forced to move furniture that she was not medically able to move. Further, the action involved claims of “retaliation” when she complained that this coercion caused her to injure her arm, hand, and shoulder which employer refused to accommodate her disability which eventually resulted in her being terminated.
  • Action for discrimination based on pregnancy claim involved female dispatcher who applied for supervisor position but although asserting that she was most qualified was not promoted to supervisor position because of employers reliance on outside testing firm that her physical condition could impair job performance.
  • Employment action brought by company’s president executive assistant. The claim involved wrongful conduct in which she claimed that she was improperly questioned during interview re her plans for marriage and children. The basis of the action was the classification of employment as she claimed that most of her duties were non-exempt depriving her of her labor rights to meal periods and overtime pay.
  • An employment suit brought by sales associate in store of large national retailer. The claim involved that her co-worker subjected her to numerous unwanted and inappropriate advances, some of which took place in front of the store Manager. These repeated complaints regarding her co-worker were not responded in a proper manner but were attempted to be informally resolved by her store manager by forcing her to meet with manager and offending co-worker and as result plaintiff suffered emotional and mental disabilities from being forced to continue working with manager and harassing co-worker.
  • Action against National retailer for sexual harassment and sexual assault by store loss prevention manager against sales associate who agreed to accompany manager after store closed to discuss loss policies. After the claimed assault by loss prevention manager her complaint against the manager was not adequately investigated and alleged assailant was not transferred or disciplined. Given the nature of the sexual assault claim numerous issues were raised regarding disability violations by her employer.
  • A complex employment action involving age, and gender discrimination along with wrongful termination and retaliation for violation of public policy. Essentially, the claim arose from the demotion of plaintiff from her national sales executive position with a large medical device manufacturer. She was offered the position of Manager which offered similar compensation but not authority. Her position was taken by a younger male subordinate.

view all


  • Numerous other cases involving claims by insured for bad faith denial by insurers.
  • A suit challenging the assignment to severely injured plaintiff of manufactures liability policy. The issues in the case involved the negligence of manufactures broker in not renewing policy that was assigned by manufacture as part of settlement with the injured plaintiff insured
  • A complex bad faith action seeking to recover millions in embezzlement losses under a crime coverage policy which was issued and renewed multiple times by broker and insurance entities.
The case was riddled with unique interpretation issues in addition to counter claims for recession and indemnity.


  • Legal malpractice action by former landlord client against former attorney. Plaintiff claimed negligence of former attorney in defending him against tenant claiming breach of contract and discrimination


  • Personal injury claim against public entity, alleging damages and injury of hip fracture caused by an alleged dangerous condition of a garage parking lot, issues of constructive notice/design immunity and vicarious liability.
  • Slip and fall of plaintiff over raised curb of defendant public entity. Plaintiff claims injury to lower back needing surgery – objective finding of disk problem.
  • Wrongful death/survivor action against a medical device distributor claiming that the machine used by the decedent was not properly set as required by manufacturer and failed to function properly resulting in sever pulmonary distress of the decedent.
  • Personal injury suit against grocery store for negligence in failing to maintain premises in free of hazards. Plaintiff claimed that she slipped and fell on wet floor suffering injuries from her fall. Defendant responded by claiming that the floor was safe, and further it did not have notice of the claimed hazard.
  • A personal injury claim against a public entity. The claim asserts that plaintiff was injured by alleging that the public restroom was in a dangerous condition causing her to fall and suffer injuries to her knees requiring knee replacement. Defendant denied liability and asserted further that plaintiff injuries were caused by pre-existing conditions.
  • Personal injury claim against a public entity. Plaintiff who was suffering from cancer claimed that she lost her grip because of a sticky substance on handrail which caused her to fall down a flight of stairs sustaining injuries as well as aggravation of her cancer. Defendant entity claimed no dangerous condition of the handrail and plaintiff’s aggravation was not caused by defendant’s negligence relating to condition of handrail.
  • Action brought against attending, treating doctors and hospital for negligence and medical malpractice brought by senior and family for injuries suffered when medical procedure to intubate caused senior patient ribs to break and lungs to collapse.
  • Negligence claim against buyer of scrap metal for chest injuries to plaintiff delivery driver caused by its employee forklift operator when unloading a large load of scrap metal.
  • Lawsuit brought by children of $ 54 million Arizona lotto winner who claimed that step mother had wrongfully caused father’s lethal heart attack by overdosing on cocaine. The action also sought fraud, and contract damages for removal of lotto proceeds from Arizona to California.
  • Persona injury action for facial and scarring injuries suffered by plaintiff who was struck by vehicle when plaintiff was skateboarding in crosswalk.
  • Action offering unique standard of care issues against police department, and city jail for severe injuries suffered by plaintiff after he agreed to assist law enforcement as a “snitch” was then promised to be put in witness protection for his cooperation however he was released and severely beaten by an unknown assailant.
  • A complex medical practice claim against a recognized orthopedic surgeon and hospital for malpractice and medical battery before and after the surgery claiming that doctor failed and never intended to perform the decompression and fusion surgery (i.e., PLIF), nor the decompression and fusion surgery (i.e., TLIF) represented to plaintiff patient. Instead it was claimed that he chose to use his own new experimental type of surgery using as a “guinea pig” for a lumbar bone graft which plaintiff claimed exceeded her consent and caused permanent compression of two nerve roots.
  • personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle vs. skateboard collision Plaintiff 14 years old at the time was apparently riding his skateboard into a crosswalk, when he collided with a vehicle being operated by employee of car dealership which was test driving vehicle. Complex damages arising from the claims that minor suffered traumatic brain injury as well as orthopedic injuries to his leg and back necessitating future medical expenses, and future life care.
  • Negligence claim brought by mechanic of car dealership who was instructed by contracted dealership Management Company to work outside of assigned duties and trim branches from an obstructing tree. Plaintiff without proper training in effort to follow his superior instructions attempted to cut limb but fell sustaining severe back injuries. A novel issue was that the dealership was a franchise of a large national chain which raised issues as to whether exclusivity provisions under workers compensation applied and vicarious liability.
  • An action involving the vicarious liability between general contractor and subcontractor in which subcontractor employee was injured by falling into a large hole which was opened as part of a storm drain project.
  • A lawsuit on be half of disabled student of school district who was sexually assaulted by teacher’s assistant for Special Education. Claim was made against the school for negligently hiring this assistant as it was claimed by the parents and other students that he had other prior offensive conduct. The case had large prayer for punitive damages.
  • An assault and battery action brought by former church volunteer against very well-known church and pastor. The suit claimed that the Pastor’s assistant had been instructed to remove the former church member from further teaching and if she refused then they were to use force. Plaintiff was in fact removed by church security personal who in the course of removal plaintiff suffered significant shoulder and back injuries requiring multiple surgeries. An Interesting issue in case was reasonable use of force in the removal of plaintiff.
  • Multiple premise liability cases
  • Multiple automobile v. automobile cases.

view all


  • This was a condemnation case over the partial taking of part of commercial parking lot of a small shopping center owned by defendant. Compensation was an issue but also a separate claim for inverse condemnation for the city refusing to allow signage to mitigate the impact of the parking lot’s partial loss.
  • Suit was brought against a city by a builder owner seeking to have building permits issued to continue to develop his property for the construction of residences after annexation by the city. The dispute centered on whether he had acquired vested rights prior to the properties annexation. The claimed that the properties in a half built state constituted public nuisance.
  • Complex real estate case with overlap in public financing law involving a claim from the purchaser of a solar panel system purchase thru a specific public program which offered lower commercial property tax reductions for buying solar under the program. The property owner sought to rescind the tax penalties and assessments claiming that the solar system was not installed by the programs contractor.
  • A suit arising from the challenged conversion of Mobil Home Park by City interesting issue in the case were application of specific municipal and Government code provisions. For example whether the conversion review could incorporate Coastal Commission process.
  • A suit claiming that city was responsible for the diminution in value for a contract to purchase by seller for the discovery of an underground oil pipeline on the property. The case raised issues of Statute of limitations and government claims procedures as defense to breach.
  • A suit demanding Injunctive relief as well as breach of MOU brought against City for seeking to outsource public facilities specifically city jail. The litigation concentrated on the extent of City authority to modify or alter the collective bargaining process incorporated in the existing employee contracts.
  • A claim brought by former policeman relating to denial of concealed weapons permit by the police chief.
  • A suit by homeowner against the California Coastal Commission challenging conditions for development of his beach front property demanded by Coastal Commission. The conditions related to what the homeowner claimed were arbitrary violative of due process as they sought to encumber his property through deed restrictions.
  • A suit to challenge the removal of long standing permits to use city docks by reclassification of these facilities as state managed leading to a significant increase in fees and taxes for the longs tanding city users.
  • Numerous cases seeking writ of mandamus relief for both state and local agency actions.

view all


  • Remodeling of Luxury residence which contractor failed to perform as required by contract. 2nd contractor had to repair and fix the poor construction of the original contractor.
  • Suit against a broker by a buyer of commercial real estate property who claimed that broker misrepresented his financial investigation causing his buyer client to incur greater cost because his investment failed to return cash flow assured by broker. Plaintiff also claimed that defendant broker had mishandled the lease negotiations which also caused him to suffer damages from higher lease rates.
  • A suit brought against title insurer who it was claimed failed to investigate claim brought by insured for non-disclosure of private covenant between prior owner and neighbor which precluded construction on insured’s property.
  • First step mediation in real estate dispute. The dispute is over a case of fiduciary fraud by plaintiff’s broker in the purchase of a residence in an age restricted community. Which resulted in plaintiff buyer not being able to live with minor grandson despite assurance from broker they could have child with them.
  • Purchase and sale of multi-unit commercial property damages against seller and seller’s broker brought by buyer for failing to disclose. Unpermitted rehab and work on building alleging fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract against buyer’s broker.
  • Dispute over purchase and sale of real property and business. Dispute centralized on whether seller validly terminated agreement which buyer claimed he was induced to sign their fraud. Buyer also brought action to give title to the property along with claim for substantial loss profit damages.
  • Real Estate disclosure fraud regarding the concealment of an improvement trust impacted value of purchase.
  • 1st step mediation in real estate dispute, the disputes is over a claim a fiduciary fraud by plaintiffs’ broker and in the purchase of a residence in an age restricted community which resulted in plaintiff buyer not being able to care for minor grandson. Despite assurances from broker they could have child with them.
  • Claims for usury against payments on a real estate secured note. Also claim that the “default interest” provision of secured note acted as a penalty and was not enforceable.
  • Handled a matter involving a claim by buyer that seller had failed to disclose water intrusion which led to mold contamination. Further, that the repairs that had been done prior to move in were done without permits and they had not been disclosed. Seller claimed that buyer’s inspector was aware of the repairs and that they had disclosed the water intrusion.
  • ·       Handled a matter involving a suit against a residential landlord by tenant for breach of warranty’s of quiet enjoyment and habitability when tenant was informed that prior water intrusion was not repaired by landlord by inspector. Landlord also sued insurer for failing to process his claim for the damages including mold exposure to tenant.
  • Prior owner of residential property sued lender for violation of California Homeowner Bill of Rights claiming wrongful foreclosure stemming from lender’s inadequate notice and response to plaintiffs request for re-financing which led to trustee sale of plaintiff’s home.
  • Wrongful foreclosure action brought against foreclosing lenders and third party buyers claiming failure to properly post the Notice of Sale; properly notice plaintiff as lienholder of Notice of Sale; and fail to publish in the manner required under Civil Code the Notice of Sale. In addition to Civil code violations relating to notice there was also a claim that the sale was not compliant with the foreclosure procedures set forth in Civil Code section 2924 et seq.
  • Litigation stemmed from former tenants claim that landlord had breached the lease agreement notice provisions on sale of property. It was also claimed that lease was breached by landlord’s failure to provide proper accounting and return of deposited funds.
  • A claim brought by a commercial Lessee as against the new Buyer/Lessor for the unlawful demand and procuring of “triple net lease charges”. The claim was made in connection with the purchase of a large commercial property. A key issue in the acquisition were the underlying lease agreements as to what payments and charges would be assessed. There was also a potential claim by the seller against its property manager/sales broker in breach of Fiduciary duties relating to the purchase and sale of the commercial property.
  • An action seeking equitable and legal remedies for quiet title, reformation, and fraud in the transfer of quit claim deed to rental property between joint tenants. Plaintiff’s claims stemmed from the claimed fraudulent transfer and breach of agreement between joint tenants to the disputed title to property used for rental income. Also part of the dispute included a pending unlawful detainer action consolidated with the title dispute. One unique feature of crafting a creative solution to this real property dispute is that this mediation was conducted entirely in Spanish as that was the language preference of the litigants.
  • Real estate action brought by personal lender seeking quiet title to commercial rental property for portion of purchase that he had financed in giving a loan to purchasing partner who failed to convey title after property purchased. The plaintiff also sought damages for breach of contract and fraud. The defendant owner counter claimed also for fraud against plaintiff
  • Real Estate dispute which seller and his broker were sued for failing to disclose material terms relating to the conditions of the residence which required the buyer to incur significant cost to repair the conditions. Both the buyer and seller also sued their brokers for negligence in their research on the property.
  • Complex commercial lease dispute over the rights and obligations in the long term commercial lease. Plaintiff company leased a location for expansion of its business. Plaintiff sued for breach of contract, misrepresentation, fraud and unfair business practices against defendant landlord. The dispute centered around the failure of landlord to perform the agreed upon construction and improvements to tailor existing building for plaintiff exclusive use. Landlord sued for back rent, and damages for breach of lease by plaintiff.
  • Real estate suit brought by buyer of commercial duplex against seller for failing to disclose that certain improvements and fixtures were built without the appropriate building permits from the city.
  • Real estate dispute between buyer and seller of a residential property. Buyer claimed that seller had fail to disclose the substantial soil subsidence history to buyer. Buyer claimed that this non-disclosure was material after large cracks began appearing at the front of the house. Seller countered that they had disclosed the soil conditions. Further, the claimed that plaintiff had known of the cracks and agreed to reduce the purchase price.
  • Real estate dispute involving seller, buyer and brokers relating to the lack of disclosure by seller of a material defect involving designation of sewer which was actually a septic and not connected to public sewer. Buyer sought damages for breach of contract.
  • Pre-litigation mediation real estate case over a dispute as to luxury lease as to breach of contract and damages to high-end residence from prior tenant.
  • Homeowner association was sued by homeowner for violation of CCR’s and Civil Rights after being ordered to tear down a front wall which had been built without the permission of the HOA.
  • Real estate dispute between neighbors one of which claimed that adjoining property had been compromised by backyard improvements this then caused flooding of plaintiffs property when it rained for an extended period.
  • Real estate dispute with first step mediation provision. Claim was made by buyer of residential property that seller had failed to make material defect specifically mold contamination. Seller disputed this claim contended that sellers contractor disclosed to buyer this defect and buyer proceeded with the purchase.
  • Complex real estate litigation involving plaintiffs claim that she purchased a residential property which the mold remediation at the time of purchase was completely inadequate. The key issue in the dispute was the quality of the post remediation testing which from plaintiff’s view had rendered the residence uninhabitable and toxic to her children. There were significant issues of medical causation and damages from the chronic mold exposure.
  • A lawsuit between a private lender who held a deed of trust securing a 2.5 million dollar beach front residence which loan was used by the contractor owner to build and sell the “spec “house. The property was then sold to a purchaser who assumed the loan under a lease option purchase. The action involved multiple claims between the parties and brokers over breach of guarantees made by the builder to the lender and the purchaser to the lender which were integral to the initial commercial property loan.
  • A complex real estate litigation plaintiff real and commercial property was used as security for a Plaintiff a famous athlete for a 15 million start up working capital loan for a consulting service for professional athletes. The Venture required not only the loan but as aparticipant plaintiff had to deposit a substantial cash contribution for which she was issued a letter of credit that the anticipated income would pay for. The venture failed and the action focused on the foreclosure actions of lenders over the secured property which was countered by multiple claims of fraud, and breach of contract.
  • A claim by luxury apartment tenant for failure to address flooding damage. The suit not only involved provisions regarding habitability but also overlapped into a complex litigation from the effects on plaintiff after she vacated. Specifically, whether her resulting repertory problems had been caused by the landlord’s failure to remediate the claimed toxic mold created by the flooding.
  • A complex and very public action involving a major shopping center which was the subject of a lengthy foreclosure related to multiple lender banks holding a deed of trust, assignment of rents and various security agreements over adjoining parking and office structures totaling $105 million.
  • Numerous residential foreclosure lawsuits brought by lenders against delinquent homeowners.
  • Numerous commercial lease actions involving breach of covenants relating to tenant improvement and non competition as well as non-payment of rent.

view all


“Judge Rodriguez did a great job in trying to steer the parties toward settlement. I could tell that he was well prepared and understood the issues. I would both use him again and recommend him to other attorneys. His Spanish-speaking skills were also very useful.”

Judge Luis Rodriguez is a really awesome mediator. Highly impressed and would definitely recommend.