Hon. Teresa Sanchez-Gordon (Ret.)



  • 2000 – 2017    Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court, Stanley Mosk Civil Courthouse
    – Independent calendar court, 2001-2017
    – Handled cases in the areas of class actions, insurance coverage, business, employment, professional liability (legal and medical), among others
    – Site Judge, long cause felony and civil calendar, Alhambra, 2000
  • 1997 – 2000    Judge, Los Angeles Municipal Court
    – Presiding Judge, 1999-2000, East Los Angeles
    – Presided over a direct misdemeanor calendar
    – Elected in 1996, elevated upon court unification in 2000


  • Personal Injury
  • Employment
  • Business & Commercial
  • Professional Liability (Legal and Medical)
  • Insurance Coverage
  • Real Estate


  • 1990 – 1996    Deputy Federal Public Defender, Office of the Federal Public Defender
    –  United States Courthouse, Central District
  • 1988 – 1990    Director, Los Angeles County Federation of Labor
    Labor Immigrant Assistance Project
    –  Helped immigrant workers obtain legal status under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986


  • Woman of the Year Award, Los Angeles County Commission on Women
  • Abriendo Caminos Award, Latina Lawyers Bar Association
  • Hispanic Woman of the Year Award, Mexican American Opportunity Foundation
  • Outstanding Alumna Achievement Award, People’s College of the Law
  • Distinguished Judges Award, Presiding Judges Association, Los Angeles Municipal Court
  • Adelita Award, Dolores Huerta Foundation


  • J.D., People’s College of the Law
  • Immaculate Heart College


  • Founder, Latina Lawyers Bar Association
  • Board Member, Mexican American Bar Foundation
  • Executive Board, California Judges Association
  • National Association of Women Judges
  • President, California Latino Judges Association
  • Faculty Member, Center for Judicial Education and Research (CJER)
  • Judicial Delegate to Mexico headed by California Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George


  • Board Member, Proyecto Pastoral at Dolores Mission Church
  • Mentor, YMCA
  • Chairperson for the Board of Directors, Mexican American Opportunity Foundation
  • Frequent host to students at the courthouse
  • Lecturer at community and school forums on court/community issues


Judge Sánchez-Gordon is fluent in Spanish and is readily available to assist counsel with Spanish-speaking clients.


Prior to her election to the bench, Judge Sánchez-Gordon began her professional career as an elementary schoolteacher in Los Angeles after graduating from Immaculate Heart College. While a schoolteacher, she attended People’s College of the Law in the evenings and was admitted to the California State Bar in 1988.

Judge Sánchez-Gordon was born in Mexico and raised in East Los Angeles. She is the eldest of eleven children. She now resides in Silver Lake with her husband, attorney Walter L. Gordon, III. Together, they are proud parents and grandparents.

Representative Cases


  • Dispute between disabled patron and restaurant. Plaintiff uses a wheelchair and alleged he was unable to patronize restaurant without experiencing difficulty, discomfort, and embarrassment due to the poor layout and construction. Causes of action were violation of Health & Safety Code sections 19955 et seq. and violation of the Unruh Act.
  • A disabled patron of a liquor store who used a wheelchair complained of various violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Plaintiff sent a warning letter to the liquor store, but no repairs were made.


  • Dispute involving multiple alleged violations of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act in connection with a 2003 BMW automobile which plaintiff contends was wrongfully repossessed while timely payments were being made. Plaintiff sought monetary damages, restitution, and injunctive relief.
  • Plaintiff purchased all interest and assets from defendant’s business. Defendant orally agreed not to compete with the business. Defendant competed with the business.
  • Action for unlawful business practices arising out of plaintiffs’ booking of room rentals through defendant AirBNB’s online marketplace.
  • Plaintiff is a non-profit which provides medicine for HIV and AIDS patients regardless of ability to pay. Defendants hold themselves as a referral service, and other defendants used their services. Defendants allegedly schemed to transfer plaintiff’s patients to defendants including offering illegal inducements to plaintiff’s pharmacy customers and accepting kickbacks from other defendants.
  • Plaintiff purchased a pharmacy from defendants connected to defendant’s medical practice. Defendants assured plaintiff the medical practice would continue. Three months after plaintiff purchased the pharmacy, defendants sold the medical practice to a company which had its own pharmacy, and plaintiff’s business had no customers. Defendants allegedly knew they were selling the practice to a company with a pharmacy when they sold the business to plaintiff.
  • Franchise dispute involving a coffee store. Plaintiff, the franchisee, paid for a new store to be opend in San Diego. Defendants changed the location to Los Angeles. Plaintiff alleges that defendants failed to provide the agreed-upon services and items, and business was not good. Plaintiff also claims that defendants used false sales reports to mislead plaintiff into believing his profits would be significantly higher.
  • A condominium owner was notified of a lien recorded against her property by the HOA. She requested an accounting of the monies defendants allege she owes, but has not received one.
  • Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with defendant, providing defendant with $300,000 which was to be repaid in two years. Defendants failed to timely pay back the loan. Plaintiff sued for breach of contract, open book account, account stated, unjust enrichment, and constructive trust.
  • Breach of contract action. Defendant gave plaintiff a promissory note for $50,000. Defendant did not pay the note. Plaintiff alleged a single cause of action for breach of contract and sought repayment of the loan plus interest and attorneys fees.
  • Plaintiff resides in a gated community where access to the property for nonresidents is controlled. Plaintiff stated this was a substantial factor in his decision to reside there. Plaintiff alleges that the leasing office permitted a process server on the property to serve plaintiff, let the process server remain on the property unattended for several hours, and gave the process server information about plaintiff. The complaint alleged negligent infliction of emotional distress and breach of contract.
  • Breach of contraction dispute wherein Plaintiff was Executive Vice-President of Design for defendant. Plaintiff’s compensation was to include commissions of sales of $100,000. Defendants refused to pay commissions.
  • Breach of contract dispute wherein plaintiff and defendant owned a business together. Defendant agreed to purchase plaintiff’s half, but did not. Plaintiff sued and obtained a judgment. Defendant subsequently transferred all his assets to others with no compensation, while retaining control over the transferred assets, and fled to China. Plaintiff alleged fraudulent transfer, alter ego enterprise liability, and unjust enrichment.
  • Breach of contract matter between construction company and property owner. Plaintiff provided construction services to improve property owner’s house. Defendant then failed to pay.
  • Breach of contract dispute involving plaintiff who purchased cell phones from defendants, paying in advance. Defendant never delivered the phones. Plaintiff and defendants then entered into an agreement for defendants to pay plaintiff the money for the undelivered phones. Defendants failed to do so.
  • Breach of contract case involving two people who were previously in a romantic relationship for 18 years, during which time plaintiff was the primary breadwinner for their household. Plaintiff fully supported defendant for a period of 3 years when defendant was unemployed. Plaintiff alleges that defendant agreed to repay her $36,000 over a period of 36 months. Defendant made one payment and then defaulted on their agreement.
  • Breach of contract dispute wherein plaintiffs filled various orders placed by defendants. Defendants failed to pay.
  • Breach of contract dispute wherein plaintiff ran a marketing company generating over $100 million a year. Plaintiff hired defendant as an employee and accountant for the company. Plaintiff alleged that defendant fraudulently transferred ownership of company stock to himself and embezzled company funds. Plaintiff sought full payment of embezzled funds as well as interest and an accounting, injunctive relief, and punitive damages.
  • Breach of commercial lease agreement involving tenants who failed to pay rent and abandoned the premises. Landlord sought back rent and attorneys’ fees and costs.
  • Breach of contract dispute wherein plaintiff loaned defendants $30,000. The loan agreement provided that if defendants defaulted on payment of the first $10,000, defendants would transfer 10% of the shares in defendant corporation to plaintiff. Defendants defaulted on all payments and failed to transfer the shares.
  • Commercial lease dispute wherein plaintiff claims that defendant management property failed to maintain structural portions of the premises, including the walls, flooring, and roof. Plaintiff alleged that substandard repairs led to rain and other water runoff entering the premises and damaging the interior. Defendants argued that it upkept the property as required by law and that several of the repairs being sought were the tenant’s responsibility pursuant to the lease agreement.
  • Business dispute involving several subsidiaries and officers of the parent company. Plaintiffs asserted claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, negligence, unjust enrichment, and fraud.
  • Breach of contract matter alleging that defendant failed to provide “as-built” plans for premises as described in the contract.
  • Breach of contract matter involving a plaintiff who provided $400,000 to defendants to purchase a 30% interest in a company. Defendants misappropriated the money for their own use and failed to return the money when plaintiff terminated the contract.
  • Fraud and breach of contract dispute involving a hip-hop artist who entered into a public relations agreement with defendant. Plaintiff agreed to pay defendant a monthly fee plus expenses in exchange for defendant creating and promoting plaintiff’s music brand. Plaintiff alleged that defendant inflated his actual expenses and overcharged plaintiff.
  • Breach of contract matter involving a transport company who was retained to transport coal ore from Mexico to China.
  • Breach of contract matter involving a staging company which was retained stage property for sale. Plaintiff alleged that defendant did not use the staging to sell the property but to lease the staging materials to use in the property.
  • Breach of contract and promissory fraud matter wherein plaintiff and defendants entered into an agreement for plaintiff to be a distributor of defendant’s products. The business was sold and the new owner did not want plaintiff to distribute the products. Defendants terminated the distributor agreement.
  • Dispute involving a breach of non-disclosure agreement wherein plaintiff alleged that defendant breached the NDA by unauthorized distribution and use of plaintiff’s proprietary information, unauthorized competition, interference with plaintiff’s business relationships, and bad-faith denial of the NDA.
  • Commercial lease dispute wherein the tenant agreed to pay CAM charges for certain areas based on his proportional square footage. Defendant allegedly overcharged plaintiff for CAM charges
  • Breach of contract matter involving a temporary staffing company which was suing a client for non-payment.
  • Breach of contract dispute involving producer agreements for a movie released in 1998. The agreements provided plaintiffs with a share of the film profits from a secured account. Plaintiffs alleged they never received an accounting of the film’s receipts, which they were entitled to. They were told there were no profits and the film sustained a loss, which is why they never requested the accounting. In 2013, plaintiffs learned that the movie had been profitable, and defendants had diverted the proceeds from the film to pay for two loans obtained to work on unrelated films.
  • The plaintiff journalist agreed to update defendant photographer’s brand. Defendant’s career was at a standstill at the time. Plaintiff worked aggressively for two years, and defendant’s career took off. Both parties formed a partnership, and defendant agreed to pay plaintiff a share of the profits and for her prior work. A few months later, defendant terminated the contract.
  • Breach of contract matter involving a promotion company which was retained to promote plaintiff’s brand. Plaintiff paid but defendant did nothing. Plaintiff discovered that defendants had engaged in this scheme numerous times all over the country, entering promotions contracts, doing nothing, and using the money for personal expenses.
  • Dispute involving investment partners who had been friends for years. The partners purchased a property together, but plaintiff was not named on the deed as an owner. Plaintiff alleged that he worked for years to find the best use for the property and located a deal for $17.5 million and defendants subsequently negotiated the deal excluding plaintiff.
  • Business dispute involving two parties in a business venture that operates without corporate formalities. Defendant is the sole owner of the business but offered plaintiff a partnership interest. Plaintiff and defendant entered into an oral agreement to evenly divide the gross fees from a particular business deal. Defendant received full fees from the deal but refuses to pay plaintiff.
  • Business dispute requesting an accounting and conversion. Defendant assigned and conveyed to plaintiff a 33% interest in her cocktail lounge business in Studio City. In 2014, defendant sold the business for an amount over $800,000 and has not paid plaintiff her respective share of the proceeds.
  • Partnership dispute involving a plaintiff who sued for accounting, breach of contract and multiple other causes of action, contending that he is entitled to a share of partnership profits allegedly promised in his employment offer.
  • Partnership dispute involving co-owners of a corporation. Plaintiff alleges he entered into a written agreement with his partners whereby they agreed to buy his 50% interest in the company for $55,000. Defendants took control of his interest but failed to remit the funds.
  • Partnership dispute wherein one partner was discovered to have taken adverse actions against the business, causing it to close. Plaintiff began an accounting and discovered that defendant had been embezzling from the business for years and was using partnership assets for her personal expenses.
  • Partnership dispute involving business partners engaged in a warehouse and retail stone business. The dispute arose over division of profits.
  • An investor and limited partner in a nightclub received a letter from defendant, who operated the nightclub, demanding an additional $2.5 million contribution or his interest would be diluted. Plaintiff then requested financial documents that he was entitled to receive under the partnership agreement. Defendants refused to provide him with the information.
  • Plaintiff deposited $10 million in an account with defendant, his investment portfolio manager. Defendant invested plaintiff’s money into gold, silver, oil and gas. Plaintiff closed the account in 2015 and had a total gain of $1.2 million, but alleges that he should have had a gain in excess of $8.2 million if the money had been properly invested. He sued for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, constructive fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unfair business practices.
  • Plaintiff’s property burned down in a fire. Plaintiff obtained property insurance through the defendant, and believed the insurance policy was issued and sent defendants payments for the insurance. Plaintiff received notice that the policy would be cancelled and notified defendant. Defendants agreed to take care of the matter, and plaintiff continued to pay for the policy. Defendants did not make payment on the policy, and it was canceled prior to the fire, leaving plaintiff without insurance. Plaintiff alleged negligence, breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud.
  • Plaintiff alleged breach of fiduciary duty when his broker began arranging loans from plaintiff to other bank customers. After one such loan arrangement, plaintiff discovered that the loan recipient was not in good financial shape and refused to fund the loan.
  • Dispute involving a homeowner and his insurance broker. Plaintiff asked for full coverage homeowner’s insurance, but only obtained limited fire insurance. Plaintiff asked for a copy of the policy but defendant never provided one. When plaintiff’s home suffered water damage and plaintiff tried to file a claim, his claim was denied and he discovered that his policy was only a limited fire damage policy.
  • Plaintiff sued their accountants for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, conversion and abuse, alleging that over a period of almost 20 years, defendants mismanaged the plaintiffs’ assets, resulting in a near total loss of all assets they were charged with managing.
  • Dispute between plaintiff fabric supplier and defendant fashion company. Defendant purchased fabric from plaintiff and plaintiff delivered the fabric. The checks that defendant remitted for payment were not honored by the bank.
  • Plaintiff, a doctor, sued for fees that he was allegedly owed by respondent. Respondent refused to arbitrate as required by the parties’ agreement.
  • Plaintiff, the Wynn Las Vegas, obtained a Nevada judgment against defendant for outstanding gambling debts. Wynn has been unable to collect on the judgment and alleged that defendant and his long-term girlfriend were hiding assets.
  • Fee dispute matter between litigant and her attorney. Plaintiff attorney performed legal services and defendant failed to pay. Plaintiff claimed breach of contract and sought payment, interest, and attorneys’ fees.
  • Plaintiff’s assignor loaned money to defendant to finance education expenses. Defendant failed to repay the loan.
  • Plaintiff loaned defendant money secured by defendant’s rental real property and a written assignment of rents. Defendant defaulted on the payment of the loan.
  • Business dispute wherein plaintiff entered into a contract with defendant for defendant to sell plaintiff’s product. Defendant sold the product, but failed to report all the sales and kept the profits from the unreported sales for himself.
  • Plaintiff sold goods to defendant at defendant’s request. Defendant failed to pay for or return the goods.
  • Dispute involving two parties who were previously in a romantic relationship. They purchased real property in joint tenancy, and made unequal contributions in the property. Plaintiff contributed a much larger share and loaned defendant money and paid his expenses, with the expectation of repayment. Defendant failed to pay.
  • Plaintiff entered into a factoring agreement with defendant, guaranteed by other defendants. Plaintiff advanced money to defendant, the advances were not repaid.
  • A women’s clinic obtained a loan from a major national bank and subsequently defaulted.
  • Plaintiffs made loans, advances and issued letters of credit for defendant corporation secured by promissory notes, collateral and a guaranty by individual defendant. Defendants defaulted.
  • Plaintiff and defendant entered into a game development contract. Plaintiff delivered the work but defendant failed to pay.
  • Fee dispute between an expert witness retained by an attorney. Plaintiff, the expert witness, invoiced defendant regularly for several years for work on a case. The parties reached an agreement that plaintiff would be paid in full upon settlement of the case. Defendant obtained large settlements, but only made a partial payment.
  • Plaintiff is a shareholder in defendant corporations and provided defendants with lines of credit. Defendant used the lines of credit to pay for personal expenses. Despite demand, no payment has been made on the lines of credit, and books and records of corporations have not been made available to plaintiff despite demand.
  • Plaintiff was retained by defendant to file a personal injury claim on a contingent fee basis. When plaintiff was discharged and replaced with new counsel, plaintiff filed a lien for fees and costs in the action. The matter eventually settled and settlement funds were distributed without honoring plaintiff’s lien.
  • Plaintiff non-profit corporation owned a property which a former board member deeded to a company owned by defendant. Plaintiff discovered the fraudulent deeds and retained defendant attorney to represent it in litigation over the property. Plaintiff alleges that its attorney entered into a settlement agreement without plaintiff’s approval. Its attorney was then terminated and formed a company investing in defendant company. Plaintiff lost all litigation and was not notified of the distribution of funds from sale of the property and did not receive any.
  • Plaintiff purchased a used vehicle from defendant. Plaintiff made a down payment and all installment payments, and requested the pink slip to transfer title. Defendant agreed to send the pink slip, then repossessed the vehicle and demanded money to redeem it or defendant would sell it.
  • Plaintiff entered into an investment agreement contract with defendants to invest in real property. The agreement provided that plaintiff was to invest an initial $100,000 in return for quarterly payments project at 15-16% return on investment. Defendants have not paid the quarterly payments as projected and when due under the agreement. Defendants also have not returned the principal investment amount of $100,000 after written requests were made by plaintiff as per the agreement.
  • Fraud dispute involving defendants, who convinced plaintiffs to invest $60,000 in a joint business venture to purchase a bakery. Defendants claimed that the money was released by the escrow company to the bakery owner even though the sale was never consummated. Defendants absconded with the money.
  • Dispute involving a fraudulent sale to plaintiff of a vehicle that he never agreed to purchase, never took possession of, and paid no money towards. The dealer allegedly fabricated a contract of sale and reported the transaction to the manufacturer, the lender and various governmental agencies.
  • Plaintiff tried to purchase a car from an automobile dealer but was told she did not qualify for a loan. She was told she could obtain the loan with her friend as a co-signer. Her aunt was asked to sign the contract as a witness. Plaintiff’s aunt was actually signing the loan as a co-signer. She was asked to leave a blank check which she could redeem later. Defendants filled out the blank check and cashed it. When plaintiff complained, the dealer told her she could trade in her car and the check amount would be credited towards that trade. She traded in her car, and the money was neither returned nor credited.
  • Fraud dispute wherein plaintiff purchased bottles of wine from defendant in separate transactions through an auction house. The bottles of wine were discovered to be counterfeit.
  • Dispute concerning breach of contract, fraud, violation of unfair competition law, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of oral contract arising from defendants’ formation of a purported welfare benefits plan to run an insurance sales scheme that would earn themselves commissions and fees on the sale and administration of high-commission annuity and life products. Defendants allegedly withdrew large sums of money from her annuities account without her permission and refused to return the money to her when she made complaints.
  • Dispute between an agent for a multi-story apartment building and the general contractor. The contractor alleged fraud and negligent misrepresentation against the agent, but could not provide any evidence that the agent ever made those misrepresentations. The agent counter-claimed for malicious prosecution.
  • Defendant City offered its residents homeowner rehabilitation loans that are funded by the federal government. Plaintiff applied for such a loan and was approved for $60,000. A corresponding deed of trust for $60,000 was placed on plaintiff’s home. While plaintiff’s home was still under construction, the City abruptly froze her loan, instructed the contractor to stop work in the rehabilitation project, and used the loan funds to pay the contractor for work that plaintiff never authorized.
  • Fraud dispute involving a company director who was on sabbatical to care for his ill wife. While on sabbatical, defendants stole approximately $275,000 from plaintiff’s operating funds for their personal use.
  • Plaintiffs are the fiancee and child of a man who was murdered in the course of his employment as a tow truck driver. Decedent’s mother, father, and sister tried to collect his death benefits, and raised money ostensibly for plaintiffs, which they kept for themselves.
  • Plaintiff purchased a Cadillac manufactured by defendant. The vehicle then had to be taken in for repairs five times during the warranty period. None of the defects were successfully repaired. Plaintiff demanded that defendant replace the vehicle, and defendant refused. Plaintiff alleged violation of the Song-Beverly Act, violation of implied warranty of habitability, negligence, and strict liability.
  • Plaintiff purchased a vehicle from Defendant that was represented to be a Mercedes-Benz Certified Pre-Owned vehicle, which appeared to be in good condition. The vehicle had numerous mechanical problems which began the day after the sale. Plaintiff asked Defendant to replace the vehicle, but they refused.
  • Plaintiff purchased a vehicle from defendant. During the warranty period, the vehicle developed defects which defendant was unable to repair, and defendant refused to replace the vehicle.
  • Lemon law case brought under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. Plaintiff alleged that defendant sold her a defective vehicle which suffered from transmission and sync defects that defendant repeatedly failed to repair.
  • Dispute concerning an alleged violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. Plaintiff purchased a defective Dodge Ram. The seller failed to disclose substantial engine, HVAC, suspension and electrical defects that could not be eliminated during the warranty period.
  • Breach of express and implied warranty case involving a lease agreement for a luxury vehicle. Plaintiff alleged that the vehicle had defects in the engine, keyless go system, command screen, and vehicle suspension/alignment.
  • Plaintiff purchased a certified pre-owned vehicle, but the dealer did not disclose that it was a prior rental vehicle which had also been involved in an accident. Plaintiff discovered defects and mechanical problems, and claims the vehicle is worth much less than she had initially paid for it.

view all


  • Plaintiff moved her mother into an elder care home. The home attempted to have the mother sign blank documents giving them access to her money and to her medications. After ongoing disputes between plaintiff, her mother, and the home, the home filed an action against plaintiff and an unlawful detainer action against the mother. Plaintiff then alleged SLAPPback, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, defamation, breach of fiduciary duty, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent misrepresentation.


  • Plaintiff alleged wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Plaintiff was Vice-President of Finance employed by defendant, who conducts sleep studies. Plaintiff discovered that studies had not been overseen by a RPST, as required by Medi-Care. Plaintiff notified the CFO, stating that all Medi-Care payments had to be returned. Plaintiff was terminated two days later.
  • Dispute involving a pet dental technician who was scheduled to perform examinations at various locations and paid per examination. He was required to travel in his own vehicle to examinations and was not reimbursed for expenses. He also contends that the examinations were scheduled too close together to permit meal and rest periods.
  • Employees of a restaurant/bar alleged numerous Labor Code violations and unfair business practices.
  • A lead cook in a casino reported two members of his team, who were engaged in an affair, for disappearing for hours at a time to have sex, leaving the kitchen short-staffed and preventing other employees from receiving breaks and lunches. Plaintiff issued oral warnings to the employees and reported the incidents to his supervisors, but nothing was done. He then brought illegal working conditions to HR’s attention, but nothing was done. One of the employees who was engaged in the affair reported him for sexual harassment, and he was suspended for three days. Upon his return to work, he was terminated.
  • Wrongful termination matter involving plaintiff who was employed as a controller. In 2013, she was asked to delete entries in the accounting system. She refused and called in sick. When she returned to work, the entries had been deleted. At the end of that same year, she was asked to withhold checks from deposit until after the fiscal year had ended. She refused and stated they had to be deposited and included on the year end reports. She was terminated that day.
  • Defendants allegedly failed to reimburse certain employees for the costs of their mobile phone service, which was required for the employees to perform their job duties.
  • Defendants allegedly failed to reimburse certain employees for the costs of their mobile phone service, which was required for the employees to perform their job duties.
  • Employment dispute wherein plaintiff was terminated from his employment as a gardener with defendant. Plaintiff alleged harassment and discrimination based on his national origin, and claimed that his employer retaliated against him when he reported the incidents.
  • Wrongful termination and retaliation matter. Plaintiff was employed by a bank and was given promotions for his excellent performance. His supervisor allegedly made harrassing comments about plaintiff’s religion, and required him to work overtime but refused to pay him. Plaintiff made complaints, and alleges that his supervisor retaliated by subjecting him to a false, low review rating, before eventually terminating him.
  • Race, gender, and age discrimination suit brought by plaintiff, an African-American female, against her employer, City. Plaintiff took a medical leave of absence, and subsequently extended her leave. Defendant requested that she provide her Medical Status and Work Restrictions, but she did not respond by the stated deadline. Plaintiff then resigned, alleging racial discrimination and hostile work environment.
  • An African-American female was employed by defendant, Wells Fargo Bank. Plaintiff alleged discriminatory actions and a hostile work environment, and claimed that her supervisor required her to work ‘off the clock’, and would not allow her to handle money for fear she would steal. Plaintiff developed a back injury and provided medical certifications from her doctor. Defendant allegedly failed to accommodate and terminated plaintiff’s employment.
  • Harassment and discrimination suit against corporate and individual defendants by plaintiff, a man of East Indian descent. Plaintiff alleges he was subject to harassment based on race/national origin. When plaintiff complained, the harassment became more severe. Plaintiff took a medical leave, and when he tried to return was told that he had effectively resigned his employment.
  • Employment dispute wherein plaintiff was employed by defendant as a manager. Plaintiff claims that his employer did not properly train him and continually harassed and discriminated against him. Defendant routinely denied plaintiff time off to attend church and failed to pay overtime. Plaintiff was eventually terminated.
  • Dispute involving a Hispanic plaintiff who claimed he was subjected to discrimination and a hostile work environment based on his descent, including name calling, threats of harm, and foul language.
  • Age discrimination case involving an EKG technician who had worked for her employer for 37 years when she was informed that her position was being eliminated. Her job duties were taken over by a younger worker. She alleged that younger workers were treated more favorably in the reduction of force.
  • Age discrimination case involving a plaintiff over 40 years old who was a long-term employee at a restaurant. Defendants bought the restaurant and agreed that plaintiff would not be terminated without good cause. Defendants made constant comments about plaintiff’s age, and allegedly terminated him without good cause.
  • Plaintiffs, Mexican-American LAPD officers, were assigned to narcotics and were injured and returned to work on light duty. Their supervisor allegedly ridiculed them for being Mexican-American and for their injuries, and ordered them to perform work in violation of their work restrictions.
  • Plaintiff was employed as a director of global partner marketing. When he told his supervisor he was gay, he was treated differently from the other employees. He was not allowed to meet with clients, and his work was micromanaged. He complained to HR, after which his supervisor became even more aggressive in monitoring his work and fabricating performance issues. He complained again and was terminated.
  • Racial discrimination case involving an Asian male who was employed as a systems analyst. When he brought serious security breaches to the company’s computer system to the attention of his supervisors, his supervisors ignored him. He was terminated without warning due to refusal to engage in this illegal activity. Plaintiff alleges that several other Asian employees were terminated without warning, while Caucasian employees were given warnings prior to terminations.
  • Pregnancy discrimination case involving an administrative assistant who became pregnant during the course of her employment. Upon returned to work after her maternity leave, plaintiff attempted to resume her position as an administrative assistant but was instead reassigned to a commission-based sales position. When plaintiff objected and requested that she be given her old job back, defendant refused. Plaintiff was then terminated.
  • Pregnancy discrimination case wherein plaintiff was a pharmacy tech who was ridiculed when she became pregnant. She was terminated before she took her pregnancy leave.
  • Pregnancy discrimination and failure to accommmodate case involving a dental hygienist who advised her employer that she was pregnant was concerned about conducting x-rays. The dentist told her that the walls of the dental office were not lead-lined. When she provided the dentist with her doctor’s note prohibiting her from taking x-rays, her work hours were cut along with her pay. At the same time, the dentist hired another dental hygienist and gave her a full schedule.
  • Plaintiff was diagnosed with a high-risk pregnancy, requiring time off work. Plaintiff requested a leave of absence, and was given 19 weeks including vacation time, under the CFRA and pregnancy disability leave. She was terminated.
  • Plaintiff alleged that she suffered discrimination because she was pregnant. She was also classified as an exempt employee when she was actually a non-exempt employee, and was denied overtime wages.
  • Pregnancy discrimination case involving an employee who began receiving criticism of her job performance after she notified her employer that she was pregnant. Due to complications, plaintiff was on disability leave for a few months. When she returned, her employer questioned her about her health and disability and placed her on administrative leave. She was terminated the next day.
  • An employee who developed a company’s HR department eventually became pregnant and noticed that she was being excluded from meetings. She made it clear that she only planned to take a short maternity leave and return to her job. Her employer split her job responsibilities into two, and hired two people to take the new positions and turned her office into a meeting room. She was constructively terminated.
  • Failure to accommodate action against an employer by an employee who had a disability with his feet and requested being able to sit. Plaintiff was required to take a leave, as he was told that he could not work with restrictions. Plaintiff alleges that he was harassed and disciplined for taking leave, and eventually terminated. He claims disability discrimination and harassment, retaliation, failure to accommodate, interference with CFRA, and wrongful termination in violation of public policy.
  • Plaintiff became ill and requested accommodation from his employer, which were not granted. He complained of several actions taken by management which he perceived to be in violation of wage & hour laws, and was subsequently terminated. Plaintiff alleged wrongful termination in violation of public policy, disability discrimination, and violation of California Family Leave Act.
  • Wrongful termination matter wherein plaintiff took an approved medical leave of absence to have major surgery. On her first day back at work, she was fired on the purported grounds of falsifying leave documentation and not returning to work on time. Plaintiff alleged discrimination, hostile work environment, misclassification, and wrongful termination.
  • Disability discrimination dispute involving a plaintiff who suffered an injury on the job in 2010. In 2012 plaintiff was terminated because of his injury.
  • A shuttle bus driver sued her employer for failure to provide uninterrupted meal and rest periods. In 2011, she had to take time off of work for back and leg pain, and filed a Workers’ Compensation claim. In 2012 she was cleared to return to work with permanent work restrictions. Defendant did not permit her to return to work and did not provide her with accommodations.
  • Plaintiff was employed by the county as an in-patient pharmacist. All in-patient pharmacists were ordered to work night shifts. Plaintiff began suffering severe migraines and her doctor ordered her not to work night shifts. She requested alternate scheduling. Her supervisor told her that she would be transferred to a position as an out-patient pharmacists, a job without advancement possibilities and less skills. Her supervisor told several co-workers about her request for accommodation, and they began harassing her.
  • Hotel employees claimed they were discriminated against and harassed on the basis of their medical condition and were refused accommodation. Plaintiffs were terminated based on a pretext.
  • Disability discrimination dispute involving an employee who suffered an injury which made it difficult for her to type for extended periods of time. Plaintiff’s supervisor began harassing her and withholding overtime pay. Plaintiff filed an EEOC complaint and prevailed. She then suffered discrimination and retaliation for her complaint and her disability.
  • Wrongful termination case wherein plaintiff was injured on the job and his employer refused to accommodate his disability by changing his work schedule. When plaintiff complained and also complained about not being provided with overtime pay or meal and rest periods, he was terminated.
  • Failure to accommodate dispute involving a maintenance shift supervisor who was injured on the job and had to take a medical leave of absence. Plaintiff’s doctor provided a note that stated that plaintiff was anticipated to return to work one month after his surgery. His employer allegedly refused to grant him an extension of his leave so that he could see his doctor and get a release from her to return to work. His employer demanded that he return to work and that he pass a physical in order to keep his job.
  • Disability discrimination and harassment matter involving a young woman who suffered from anxiety and depression. She requested time off for psychologist appointments and was then harassed for disability. Plaintiff took an extended medical leave, and when she attempted to return to work was told she was out of a job.
  • Civil rights matter in which plaintiff was employed by a security firm providing security to Los Angeles County facilities. Plaintiff wrote a book in 2007 and was removed from his duties as a result of the book. He asserted his First Amendment right to write the book and was then reinstated. Plaintiff alleged that his subsequent troubles with the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) were done in retaliation for writing the book and has made finding work difficult for the plaintiff.
  • Dispute involving a claim for retaliation by a Fire Equipment Mechanic employed by the City of LA. Plaintiff alleged that he suffered retaliation after serving as a witness and testifying for a female employee who brought charges of sexual harassment upon defendant.
  • A finance manager was to be paid commissions, which his employer failed to do. He witnessed his managers failing to give customers their agreed-upon credits for trade-ins and taking drugs on premises. He was subjected to harrassment when he reported these incidents, and subsequently fired.
  • Plaintiffs were terminated and/or forced to quit as a result of a hostile work environment. Defendant engaged in a pattern of harassment and inappropriate conduct in the workplace.
  • Plaintiff, an Asian-American female, was subjected to harassment and criticism by her employer for dating Caucasian males and service members. Plaintiff endured multiple forms of harassment almost daily, and complained of a hostile work environment.
  • An employee claimed he was harassed based on his national origin. He complained and cooperated in an investigation of the harassment. The harassment continued and he was falsely accused of company violations, then terminated.
  • Constructive termination dispute between an employee and a local community college district. Plaintiff reported an employee under his supervision to human resources for sexual harassment. The Dean of HR recommended termination for the offender, but the district president removed the Dean of HR and threatened plaintiff with termination if his complaints continued. Afterwards, plaintiff was subjected to threats, harassment, and retaliation by district officials. Plaintiff was eventually forced to resign.
  • Plaintiff was employed by defendant Fire Department as a mechanic. In 2009 his supervisor was constructively terminated and filed an action against the department. Plaintiff was called as a witness at the deposition and the trial. The department encouraged plaintiff to lie. He was truthful, and his supervisor obtained judgment against the department. Since that time, plaintiff has been subject to retaliation, including being transferred to a location 70 miles away.
  • Plaintiff claims he was underpaid for his vacation based on the calculation formula used by his employer. Afterwards, he was pretextually disciplined in retaliation for his wage complaints. Once, his manager called him when he was driving. Plaintiff pulled over to the side of the road before starting the conversation, and did not resume driving until the conversation ended. Plaintiff was then terminated for having a telephone conversation while driving.
  • Sexual harassment case involving a plaintiff employed by the Sheriff’s office. Her supervisor allegedly made verbal and physical sexual advances on plaintiff, offered promotions if she agreed to the advances, and threated her if she disclosed the advances. When plaintiff rejected the advances, she was given worse assignments.
  • Sexual harassment case involving an employee who was subjected to unwanted sexual conduct by her employer and clients of her employer. When she complained, no actions were taken. She then was given unwarranted disciplinary write-ups and her office was used as the employee breakroom.
  • Plaintiff was employed by defendant, and had moved to obtain the job, becoming totally dependent on defendant. Plaintiff claims that defendant sexually battered her and coerced her into having sex. When defendant tried to move her to India, she refused and was terminated.
  • Sexual harassment case involving a woman who applied for a job at a gym. Her interviewer made sexual comments and advances towards her. When she rejected the advances, she was not hired.
  • Dispute involving an alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standard Acts. Plaintiff was employed by defendant from July through December 2011, worked 15 hours a day, 7 days a week, and was never paid.
  • Wage & hour matter wherein Plaintiff alleged that she regularly worked overtime for which she was not paid. She complained that she was not paid and that her employer would not accommodate her disability. She alleges she was terminated for her complaints and was not paid her wages upon termination.
  • Class action wage & hour case brought by plaintiffs and others similarly situated who were employed as hourly employees, and allege that they were not properly paid.
  • Dispute involving plaintiffs and their employer, a restaurant. Plaintiffs sued for wage and hour claims, sexual harassment, retaliation and wrongful termination.
  • Employment dispute involving an employee in a group care home. She alleged that the home failed to pay her minimum wage, overtime premiums, failed to provide meal and rest periods, and failed to provide accurate pay stubs.
  • Employment case wherein plaintiff was employed as a cook and was not paid overtime or given meal periods.
  • Employee misclassification involving a commercial truck driver, who claimed he was misclassified as an independent contractor instead of as an employee, which resulted in him being issued gross wages without the proper deductions being taken. Plaintiff claims that during the course of his employment, he was not properly compensated for overtime, and for meal and rest periods.
  • Wage and hour dispute involving a caretaker at a senior assisted living facility located in Los Angeles. Plaintiff alleged that defendant failed to pay her overtime and was terminated upon complaining about lack of payment. Defendant claimed that plaintiff was paid all overtime due to her, and that plaintiff was the one to have voluntarily resigned.
  • Wage & hour action brought by plaintiff who was employed as a delivery man. His employers allegedly failed to pay him overtime and required that he work 10-hour shifts, 6 days a week, with no rest or lunch periods. He was terminated when he complained.
  • Employment dispute involving a young man who worked as a file clerk. During his employment, he alleged that he did not receive uninterrupted meal and rest breaks. He was injured on the job and his doctor told him not to lift heavy boxes. His employer required him to continue lifting heavy boxes. After he took a medical leave and was put on temporary disability, he was fired.
  • Wage & hour dispute involving an employee who was scheduled to work a split shift every day. He was not paid overtime, split shift time, vacation, or provided meal and rest breaks. When he was out of work for several days due to a car accident, he was terminated.
  • Wage & hour violations arising out of defendants’ misclassification of employees, failure to pay wages, failure to provide meal and rest periods, unlawful deductions, and failure to reimburse drivers for business expenses, among other violations.
  • Employee misclassification matter involving a security guard. The guard was non-exempt and was never paid for overtime or given meal or rest periods.
  • Plaintiff was employed as a non-exempt cook, dishwasher, cleaner, and food preparer in a restaurant. He alleged that he worked 12 hours of overtime per week and 8 hours of double time per week, which restaurant did not pay him for. When plaintiff complained to defendant about his failure to receive overtime pay, he was fired.
  • Wage & hour and FEHA wrongful termination case involving two individuals who were not paid for overtime wages, provided with meal and rest breaks, and provided accurate itemized wage statements. Plaintiffs allege that they were constructively terminated. Defendants claimed that all overtime was paid and that plaintiffs were provided with meal and rest breaks but chose not to take them.
  • Dispute over the enforcement of an employment arbitration agreement. Defendant, employee, filed a demand for arbitration against his employer alleging violations of various Labor Code provisions. Defendant asserted class claims as well as PAGA claims. Employer sought declaratory relief and judgment.
  • Dispute involving a manager of a marijuana growing operation and dispensary. Plaintiff’s employment contract states he was to be paid plus have a 3% ownership, modified to 15%. Defendants allegedly kept fraudulent books, and was not paid his wages upon termination and was not paid his share of the ownership interest.
  • Dispute between a salesperson and his employer. Plaintiff left his former employer to join defendants’ firm based on the commission structure. After he began working for defendants and earned commissions, the commission structure was changed.
  • Defendant worked for a manufacturer and importer of area rugs as head of sales for over three years. Upon resigning her position with plaintiff, defendant began working for a competitor
    company and used confidential information and trade secrets about plaintiff’s customers to contact said customers and offer lower prices on similar products. Defendant also told plaintiff’s customers that plaintiff was going out of business.
  • Misappropriation of trade secrets matter involving an employee of a credit card processing company. The employee allegedly diverted money from plaintiffs while employed and took employees and trade secrets with him when his employment was terminated. He worked in competition with plaintiffs using plaintiffs trade secrets.
  • Class action employment matter involving plaintiffs who were employed as installation technicians for defendant employer. The class members alleged that the employer failed to pay them for time spent traveling to and from their work sites every day, and failed to provide proper meal and real breaks. Plaintiffs were also forced to use their personal vehicles for business related travel, but were not compensated for travel time nor reimbursed for travel related expenses.
  • Class action dispute involving employees of a public school district. Class members claimed they were improperly laid off from their positions based on their race and age.
  • Class action dispute involving employees of a public school district. Class members claimed they were improperly laid off from their positions based on their race and age.
  • PAGA action to recover unpaid wages and expenses under the Labor Code. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant failed to pay overtime wages, provide uninterrupted rest periods, provide uninterrupted lunch periods, pay wages upon termination, provide itemized wage and hour statements.
  • PAGA dispute involving class members who were employed as technical specialists and were misclassified as exempt employees when they performed mostly administrative duties.
  • PAGA action involving an employer who allegedly failed to pay for all hours worked by rounding hours down, failed to pay minimum wage, provided inaccurate wage statements, failed to maintain records, failed to timely pay final wages and vacation wages.

view all


  • Entertainment dispute involving a project to produce a book into a motion picture. Defendant provided accounting services to plaintiff and became an investor in the project. Defendant was in need of money and requested a refund of his investment. When plaintiff only provided a partial refund, defendant began to spread confidential and untrue information about plaintiff in breach of the confidentiality agreement, making it difficult for plaintiff to complete the project.
  • Fraud case involving a composer who retained defendant to handle various legal matters. In 2005, defendant suggested to plaintiff that he transfer his music catalogue from BMI to SESAC. Plaintiff retained defendant to negotiate the transfer. Defendant failed to disclose that he was being paid a fee by SESAC for the transfer and that he was also representing plaintiff’s partner, both conflicts of interest. Defendant also failed to disclose that his fees would be collected in perpetuity, not just during the transfer.
  • Entertainment dispute involving a filmmaker who hired others to write screenplays based on his ideas. In 2005 plaintiff hired defendant to work on a screenplay. A company owned by plaintiff entered into an agreement with defendants to revise the screenplay. Plaintiffs assigned their rights to the screenplay to an associated production company. Defendants breached the agreement by developing the screenplay into a motion picture starring Clint Eastwood. Defendant talent agency was aware of the agreement between plaintiffs and defendant screenwriters and caused screenwriters to breach the agreement to obtain financial gain for themselves. This destroyed the value of plaintiff’s screenplay.


  • Healthcare case concerning payment disputes between plaintiffs, associations of emergency room doctors at hospitals throughout Southern California, and defendant, a health insurer. Plaintiff contend that they are not being paid the fair value of their services. Plaintiffs claimed quantum meruit, unfair competition, open book account, and services rendered. Defendant cross-complained and alleged that the doctors were misrepresenting the nature and number of services performed to obtain higher reimbursements. Defendants claimed fraud, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200.


  • Dispute between policyholder and insurance company. Plaintiff was involved in a hit-and-run accident, and believed that his insurance company would cover the damage incurred. Insurance company denied the claim for damages. Plaintiff alleged breach of contract, implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and negligence.
  • Insurance bad faith claim involving an accident in Arizona. The insurer allegedly failed to adequately repair the vehicle, pay for towing fees, or conduct a proper investigation.
  • Insurance bad faith action involving plaintiffs who were involved in an accident caused by an uninsured motorist. They sued the motorist and obtained judgment. Defendant refused to pay under the uninsured motorist benefits.
  • Subrogation matter involving The Hartford, who insured a dental practice against workers’ compensation claims. An employee of the dental practice fell on the stairs at work as a result of a defective handrail and/or steps. The insurer claimed that defendants own the building and were responsible for condition of the steps.
  • Insurance bad faith case involving a policyholder whose home was damaged by fire and smoke. He made a claim for benefits to his insurer, and alleged that defendants refused to pay the benefits owed under the policy.
  • Insurance bad faith action by a plaintiff who claimed that his parked vehicle was involved in a hit and run accident while he was away from his home. The insurer assigned an inspector to investigate the damage to his vehicle. The inspector stated that the damage to his vehicle was inconsistent with plaintiff’s incident report, and insurer refused to pay.
  • An automobile insurer received claims from defendants under their policy for an accident alleged to have occurred in 2015 and caused defendants bodily injury. The investigation into the alleged accident revealed indicators of a staged or fictitous accident, including defendant’s history of claims on questionable accounts, the descriptions of the accident in a manner in which it cannot have occurred, admission of fault by the insured, no witnesses or police reports, numerous passengers with the same injuries and the same attorney on prior questionable claims. Plaintiffs sought declaratory relief.

view all


  • Wrongful death case wherein plaintiff’s son was killed in a train/pedestrian accident when he was struck by a train. Plaintiff alleges that the defendant railroad negligently maintained the warning arms and flashing lights, the warning arms and flashing lights were habitually ignored by residents because they were inadequate, and that defendant knew the cross-traffic was ignoring the warning systems.
  • Plaintiff was a Sunday School volunteer. During one such occasion where she was acting as a volunteer, she was struck in the face by a basketball in use by a minor boy, resulting in severe injuries to her jaw, mouth, and teeth. The complaint alleges that the Church had a duty to supervise and control the conduct of students and to enforce its rules, regulations, and policies to ensure the safety of anyone on premises.
  • Dispute involving a woman who suffers from Interstitial Lung Disease caused by her long-term exposure to various chemicals she worked with or around throughout the course of her employment. Plaintiff alleged causes of action for negligence, fraudulent concealment, and breach of implied warranty.
  • Plaintiff, who suffers from schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and mood disorder, was admitted to defendant facility by her mother. While in custody of defendant facility, she was sexually assaulted by an individual employed by the facility.
  • Dispute involving child sexual abuse and negligence brought by plaintiffs, who were altar boys under the care of defendant. Plaintiffs alleged that they were sexually abused as minors and sought damages.
  • Condominium owner is a disabled resident in a condominium operated by defendants. Plaintiff contends that the only entrance gate she was able to use lacked safety mechanisms to prevent the automatic gate from opening while the pedestrian gate is in use. Plaintiff was severely injured when the automatic gate opened while she was entering through the pedestrian gate, trapping her arm and dragging her. Causes of action include premises liability, violations of FEHA, violations of Unruh, violation of Disabled Persons Act.
  • Concertgoer suffered an injury at the Viper Room. Its insurance carrier denied coverage.
  • Plaintiff sued for premises liability and negligence, alleging that a truck belonging to defendant made loud noises while unloading fertilizer/manure at B&B Stables, spooking her horse and causing it to bolt and trample her. Plaintiff suffered a broken and dislocated right shoulder, in addition to other injuries.
  • A Sony executive sued Sony as a result of the widely-publicized data breach in 2014. Defendants wrongfully accused her of stealing a $90 computer mouse. This false report was leaked in the data breach. She alleged it damaged her reputation and claimed defamation.
  • Several Chinese tourists or families of Chinese tourists sued a tour company when their tour bus was involved in an accident, causing casualties.
  • Personal injury matter involving a plaintiff who was assaulted while visiting a Pizza Hut location by its employees.
  • Assault and battery dispute involving a nightclub patron who reserved a private area in defendant nightclub. Some patrons in an adjacent private area began to harass plaintiff and his group. A confrontation broke out and a security guard employed by the club slammed plaintiff to the ground and choked him. Plaintiff sustained severe injuries.
  • An injured man sued a bus company when the bus that he was riding in was involved in an accident with another vehicle, and he sustained injuries.
  • Plaintiff leases a unit used as a music studio as well as living space. The unit is zoned for commercial use and the lease permits the music studio. Plaintiffs next door neighbors began aggressively complaining to him about the noise, making threats of physical violence. The complaints continued, even after management confirmed that the noise was not coming from plaintiff’s unit, and while he was on vacation. Plaintiff sued for assault, battery, private nuisance, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
  • Trip and fall case involving a woman who fell while getting off of a bus operated by the MTA for the City of Los Angeles.
  • An elderly tenant was severely injured when the dilapidated garage door at her leased property fell on her upper back, pinning her against the side of her car until she was extricated by her son. She sued the property owner for failure to maintain the property in a safe condition.
  • Plaintiff worked as a mold maker, machine operator and laborer. During this time he was exposed to toxic substances released from the materials he worked in and around. He developed interstitial pulmonary fiberosis, which he later discovered could be attributed to those toxins he was exposed to at work.
  • Plaintiff, who suffers from schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and mood disorder, was admitted to defendant facility by her mother. While in custody of defendant facility, she was sexually assaulted by an individual employed by the facility.
  • Plaintiff, a physician, attempted suicide and was treated at defendant hospital. Defendant disclosed plaintiff’s medical conditions and information to his employer and supervisor. Plaintiff was terminated. Plaintiff alleged negligent disclosure of medical records.
  • An Los Angeles County jail inmate alleged that members of the Sheriff’s department took him to an area with highly dangerous inmates and encouraged those inmates to rape, torture, and beat him, causing severe injuries.

view all


  • Plaintiff purchased a home by making the down payment and his parents financed the remainder. Plaintiff’s father died, and he sold the home so that his mother could refinance her own home. She agreed to pay him the money he lost in the sale and gave him a promissory note which was supposed to be secured by a deed of trust on her property. The mother put her property in a trust. The mother’s other son, defendant, had her resign as trustee and he took over. He filed criminal financial abuse charges against plaintiff, who was a beneficiary of the trust, to avoid repaying the promissory note.
  • Plaintiffs are administrators of a trust. Defendant recorded documents of a purported trust, transferring the property into that trust. The documents were alleged to have been forged or obtained by undue influence or fraud.


  • Plaintiff, who is incarcerated, alleges that he was abandoned by his attorneys at his criminal trial.
  • Plaintiff retained defendant attorneys to represent her in a family law matter based on defendant’s representation of their expertise in the area. Plaintiff alleges that her lawyers had no expertise and did a poor job of representing her. As a result, she was required to pay her ex-husband’s attorneys fees and had an unfavorable result. She sued for negligence and intentional tort.
  • Fee dispute between plaintiff attorneys and defendants. Attorneys alleged that defendants failed to pay their bill and alleged breach of contract, common count, and fraud. Defendants cross-complained for legal malpractice, alleging that the attorneys pressured her into signing a retainer letter without providing her time to obtain independent counsel to review the letter. The attorneys were unsuccessful in stopping her foreclosure action and bringing a predatory lending claim, and therefore did not provide services within the standard of care.
  • Legal malpractice case wherein the plaintiff retained an attorney to represent him in an underlying action. Plaintiff alleged that the attorney did not adequately represent plaintiff in the case, and a judgment was entered in excess of $700,000. Defendant cross-complained for breach of contract when plaintiff failed to pay.
  • Legal malpractice dispute with an underlying probate case. Defendants allegedly failed to properly resolve the estate of plaintiff’s mother, providing services that did not meet the standard of care.
  • Plaintiff loaned money to a borrower. Plaintiff’s attorney was to place a lien on the borrower’s home securing the loan and to receive the loan funds in his client’s trust account and not release them until all paperwork was completed. His attorney released the money without receiving the promissory note or deed of trust, and the borrower failed to repay the loan.
  • Legal malpractice dispute wherein plaintiffs retained attorneys to defend them in an underlying wage and hour claim. The attorneys allegedly did no work in defending against the actions, although assuring plaintiffs that their liability would be limited. On the eve of trial, attorneys had plaintiffs file bankruptcy. Plaintiffs were subjected to sanction orders and had damaged credit as a result of the bankruptcy filing.
  • A painter was injured on the job when his employer insisted he paint on the roof of a home in an unsafe manner. Plaintiff fell, suffering severe injuries. Plaintiff retained defendant attorney to bring a workers’ compensation claim against his employer and a civil claim against the homeowner. His attorney told him there was no claim against the homeowner and failed to file such a claim. By the time plaintiff discovered he did have a viable claim, the statute of limitations had run out.
  • Decedent underwent lung transplant surgery at Cedars Sinai Medical Center. During surgery, a surgical stapler allegedly malfunctioned and tore one or more major blood vessels. Decedent’s wife and daughter allege that the staple gun misfire was a substantial factor in causing decedent’s injuries and post-surgery complications that ultimately resulted in his death. Decedent’s family sued Cedars Sinai for medical malpractice and sued the staple gun manufacturer for product liability.

view all


  • Dispute involving plaintiffs and defendants who were engaged in a joint venture in real estate. Defendant permitted plaintiff to occupy the property without paying rent. Defendant eventually tried to evict plaintiff, who counter-claimed for withheld security deposits. The complaint alleged permissive waste, breach of oral contract, negligent misrepresentation, equitable indemnity, and fraud.
  • Breach of contract dispute involving plaintiff who rented a residence weekly from defendant and paid for the rental in advance. Plaintiff alleged that the residence he agreed to rent was unavailable and he was given a dilapidated unit instead, with no refund of the difference in the price of rent. Plaintiff alleged fraud and negligent misrepresentation, among others.
  • Dispute involving a real estate purchase of a single family home. Plaintiff claims that she discovered extensive termite damage in the home, the extent of which was not disclosed until after the purchase was completed. Plaintiff sued for failure to disclose, fraud and intentional misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, and violation of Business & Professions Code 8516(b)(6) and 8516(b)(7).
  • Dispute between landlord and tenant in a commercial office space. Landlord moved defendant to a comparable office space at landlord’s expense and 180-day notice, as was allowed by the lease. Landlord offered to move tenant to an adjacent suite next door in order to accommodate a major construction project. Tenant objected to the move and denied landlord and its construction workers access to the premises. Landlord alleged a single cause of action for declaratory relief.
  • Quiet title action arising out of the bank’s attempt to foreclose on plaintiff’s home.
  • Defendant’s business had a fire, which then spread to plaintiff’s business next door and burned it completely. Plaintiff alleged a single cause of action for negligence.
  • Habitability dispute between landlord and tenant. The property was subject to multiple inspections by county agencies and cited for multiple violations, including bed bug infestations, electrical, plumbing, window, wall and ceiling defects, and inadequate security. The violations were not corrected.
  • Unlawful detainer action against a subtenant who allegedly breached the terms of the lease by using space in addition to the agreed upon subleased space by placing and maintaining numerous storage or shipping containers and other items of personal property thereon. Plaintiff tenant demanded that subtenant remove all containers and items of personal property or deliver up possession of the subleased space.
  • Habitability case involving low-income tenants and defendants, their landlord and management company.
  • Plaintiffs purchased a home from Defendants, who represented the property in good condition and allegedly concealed the defects by performing cosmetic repairs to cover severe damage. The complaint alleged causes of action in negligence, breach of warranties, breach of contract, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and unfair business practices.
  • Dispute involving buyers and sellers of real estate property who entered into an agreement for plaintiffs to purchase real estate from defendant. Defendant then refused to cooperate in the purchase.
  • Plaintiff is a trustee for a trust. The trust purchased real estate property through a loan secured by a deed of trust. Defendants filed a notice of default without contacting trustee or providing him information on how to avoid foreclosure.
  • Real estate dispute wherein plaintiff purchased property from defendant, who represented the property as 4,738 square feet and failed to disclose that the garage and bedrooms over the garage were not permitted. Plaintiff attempted to sell the property and discovered the misrepresentations, which he alleges made the property worth less than what he paid for it. Plaintiff filed a claim with Fidelity, which was then denied. Plaintiff alleges breach of fiduciary duty, fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, constructive fraud, breach of contract, and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
  • Unlawful detainer action involving a commercial lease dispute wherein defendant tenant failed to pay rent. When defendants left, there was damage to the property.
  • Real estate dispute involving a trustee of a living trust. Plaintiff is trustee, and attempted to modify the mortgage. Defendant will not discuss the mortgage with plaintiff because her husband, now deceased, was the only name on the loan papers. Despite sending copies of trust papers to defendant, defendant initated foreclosure proceedings.
  • Real estate matter wherein seller and buyer entered into a real estate purchase agreement. Close of escrow was postponed by agreement upon payments by defendant. Defendant failed to close escrow and failed to make payments.
  • Commercial real estate dispute wherein defendants did not vacate the property until a year after the lease expired. When plaintiff inspected the property after defendants vacated, they discovered considerable damage to the property, and also discovered that defendants failed to pay the water and sewage bills on the property.
  • Quiet title and private nuisance matter involving two adjoining properties. Plaintiff alleges that defendant his encroached upon his property with a patio and gate and a sprinkler system which diverts water to plaintiff’s property, causing flooding.
  • Plaintiffs sought a loan modification from defendant for their home loan. Plaintiffs entered into a temporary modification and made all payments. Defendant then denied the modification, while continuing to accept plaintiffs’ payments. Plaintiffs alleged fraud, breach of contract, and breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
  • Real property transfer wherein plaintiff was 100% owner of the property. Defendant recorded a deed transferring title from plaintiff to defendant. Plaintiff’s signature was forged on the deed.
  • Plaintiff purchased a property through a loan secured by a deed of trust. Plaintiff was behind on loan payments and received a notice of default and notice of sale. Plaintiff applied for and was denied for loan modifications three times. He then filed for bankruptcy to protect his home. Defendant claimed that plaintiff had filed multiple bankruptcies in bad faith to hinder and defraud.
  • Wrongful foreclosure matter involving a plaintiff who obtained a loan secured by a deed of trust. Plaintiff went into default and applied for a loan modification. Plaintiff was eventually told the property was in foreclosure and that in order to stop the foreclosure, he needed to pay all funds to reinstate the loan. Plaintiff did so, and the property was sold anyway. Plaintiff alleges he did not receive a notice of default.
  • Plaintiff was the junior lienholder on the subject property, while defendants were the senior lienholder. The property owner stopped paying all loans. Plaintiff foreclosed on the property and is now the owner. Defendants entered into a loan modification agreement with the owner which resulted in an increase of the principal balance by $40,000. As plaintiff was lienholder at the time, its consent was needed for the modification but was not obtained. Because consent was not obtained, the additional principal was extinguished by plaintiff’s foreclosure sale.
  • Plaintiff is a 50% owner of the subject property as a tenant-in-common with Defendant, who happens to be her mother. Defendant has kept all of the rental income from the property since 2012 and continues to effectively deprive plaintiff of her rights, title, and interest in the subject property.
  • Plaintiffs executed a promissory note and deed of trust in 1990. In 2010, a notice of default was filed and a trustee’s sale was held in 2012. The assignment of the deed of trust and substitution of trustee were invalid, making the sale invalid.
  • Dispute involving nine parties who each claimed some right or interest in real property located in Torrance. Plaintiff claimed to have senior interest in the subject property. Nine defendants each claimed a secured interest in the real property pursuant to three separate deeds of trust. Several of the defendants have liens of record which clouded plaintiff’s interest in the property.
  • Habitability case involving tenants living in squalid conditions. The property has insect and rodent infestations, water leaks and mold, and is in a dilapidated condition. Plaintiff’s complaints about the property were ignored and no repairs were made.
  • Plaintiff owned real property and was the trustor of the deed of trust on that property. Defendants improperly noticed and conducted a trustee’s sale of the property.
  • Dispute involving Fidelity National Title Insurance, which issued a title insurance policy to defendant on a deed of trust purportedly issued by the owner of the real property. The deed of trust was assigned to Citigroup, and Citigroup foreclosed on the property. The property owner sued Citigroup on the grounds that defendants stole her identity and she did not take out the loan.
  • Wrongful foreclosure action involving a plaintiff who challenged the validity of foreclosure-related documents related to his property.
  • Wrongful foreclosure dispute involving plaintiffs who obtained commercial real property financed by a promissory note secured by a deed of trust. Default and notice of trustee’s sale was recorded in 2012. Plaintiffs applied for a loan modification, and their bankers told them that their application was complete and the sale would be postponed while it was being reviewed. The property was sold soon after.
  • Plaintiff was interested in acquiring multi-family residential property and was given a copy of the deed of trust stamped paid in full by the bank. In reliance on the representation that the deed was paid in full, plaintiff expended funds to purchase and improve the property. The bank foreclosed on the property due to non-payment.
  • Habitability matter involving tenants in residential rental property. Landlord threatened tenants with eviction for reporting conditions, and tried to evict tenants although the rent was paid. Tenants were forced to vacate the premises due to the uninhabitable conditions and threats by landlord.
  • Real estate dispute involving a tenant who leased property from defendants. The lease included an option to purchase. Plaintiff exercised the option, and escrow was fully funded when defendants cancelled escrow without explanation. Plaintiff demanded that defendants close escrow and complete the sale.
  • Unlawful detainer action wherein plaintiff obtained ownership of the property through a foreclosure sale. The former owner was served with a three-day notice to quit. Defendant remains in possession of the property.
  • Unlawful detainer action to recover possession of retail sales space at a shopping center and past due rent and damages.
  • A buyer purchased residential real property from defendant trust. Following a full inspection, the buyer discovered numerous, undisclosed defects in the property.
  • Quiet title action involving two brothers who formed an LLC to purchase an apartment building with their father’s money. Plaintiff had a 51% interest and defendant had a 49% interest. Defendant was to renovate the apartments but failed to do so and moved away. Plaintiff renovated the apartments and rented them to tenants. Defendants used money from the LLC for personal expenses. Plaintiff transferred the property to other plaintiff and dissolved the original LLC. Defendants recorded a fraudulent grant deed transferring the property to themselves as joint tenants.
  • Habitability dispute involving tenants who lived in a unit infested with bedbugs and roaches and had defects in plumbing and mold.
  • Plaintiff and defendant purchased property together as tenants in common. Defendant allegedly collected rents on the property without sharing those rents with plaintiff. Plaintiff asked for an accounting and partition by sale with all expenses shared, and one half the rents collected by defendant.
  • Plaintiff is the owner of real property. Defendant, a major national bank, claimed to have a home equity credit agreement with plaintiff secured by a deed of trust. Plaintiff claims he never obtained or agreed to a home equity loan or the credit agreement. Despite repeated requests, plaintiff was never provided with a copy of the credit agreement. Defendant recorded a notice of default against the property.
  • Quiet title action involving real property which was purchased from defendant with the understanding that its title was free and clear from any encumbrance. Several years later, a notice of default was recorded with respect to a 1999 deed of trust on the property.
  • Dispute between an unincorporated association comprised of community organizations against the City of Los Angeles and a land development company seeking to halt the development of a large mixed-use project in Hollywood. Plaintiffs cited the California Environmental Act.
  • Plaintiffs listed their commercial property for sale through defendant, their broker. Defendant represented that there was an all cash offer on the property, and escrow was opened. Plaintiffs then received a cancellation of contract notice to sign, providing the escrow deposit would be released to the buyer. Plaintiffs did not want the sale cancelled. It was discovered that defendant had made multiple misrepresentations to them concerning himself and the sale.
  • FEHA discrimination case involving a tenant whose landlord repeatedly entered the premises without advance notice. Landlord told plaintiff that he had to leave as the property was for Chinese tenants only.
  • Plaintiff sent a wire transfer of $120,000 to defendants as a mortgage payoff in a refinance where plaintiff acted as escrow and closing agent. When it appeared the transfer did not go through, it was sent again. Both transfers went through. Defendants agreed to return one transfer, but failed to do so.
  • Housing discrimination case based on sexual orientation. When plaintiff’s landlord discovered they were in a same-sex relationship, he began harassing plaintiffs and refused to make any repairs to the property.

view all