 |
 |
 |
|
|
||
Manis et al v. Hassan Yarpezeshkan and Dr. Arthur Laffer
A $3,200,000.00 settlement after the Jury reached a verdict, but prior to the reading of the verdict. An interesting case of alleged fraud involving patents and high technology. Plaintiffs alleged that they were told that the company had already developed and held multiple patents for the holy grail of alternative energy storage – a battery-less power supply. In order to get the plaintiffs to invest in their company, they alleged that the defendant said that they had already marketed this new product to huge customers like Microsoft and ATT. Some months later the defendant introduced the plaintiffs to their “business advisor” and board member, Dr. Arthur B. Laffer, author of the Laffer Curve. After meeting such a celebrity the plaintiffs invested in the company. In reality, at the time the plaintiffs invested in the company, it had only one patent, only a prototype product, no customers, and in fact the plaintiffs were the only other investors beyond the founders of the company.
Summary only available. More about this case in The San Diego Reader’s article...click here to download.
La Jolla Alta Master Council v. City of San Diego
This complex case handled by partner Mickey McGuire was an inverse condemnation action with elements of land subsidence involving an improperly maintained storm drain system in a La Jolla Canyon that threatened the homeowners living in on and in the area of Alta La Jolla Drive.
In a La Jolla neighborhood near Soledad Mountain Road, the City of San Diego created and operated a storm drainage system that incorporated property owned by Plaintiff. The operation of this storm drainage system by the City over several years created a massive ravine across Plaintiff's property, threatening citizens, homes, and Alta La Jolla Drive, a public road. The homeowners brought an inverse condemnation action against the City to force repairs and prevent a landslide. After the verdict a settlement of $4,500,000.00 plus over $5,000,000.00 in repairs was reached for damage caused by the operation of its storm drain system.
State of California v. Anderprises, Inc.
Caltrans contended that the Andersons had never intended to develop the property and that the property was, at best, valued as a speculative investment that would probably always be open space.
FILMWEST PRODUCTIONS V. ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
An unusual case in Arizona involving denial of tax incentives for a movie picture production company. The Arizona Department of Commerce, in violation of Arizona law, denied our client the tax incentives they were entitled to even though our client met all the legal requirements and that the incentives were mandatory. A bench verdict for our clients. Lead attorney was associate Karen R. Frostrom.
Walter F. Sweeney v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Plan
Sweeney alleged that his chronic drug addiction and consequent inability to maintain the requisite mental state for employment was caused by the indiscriminate drug practices of the NFL. By Sweeney's own account, team personnel with the Chargers and Redskins recommended and supplied to him a plethora of prescription strength controlled substances. The Court's opinion noted the careful administration of amphetamines by trainers before Sunday games and important practice sessions followed by post contest barbiturates of various sorts, also administered by trainers, was Sweeney's typical regimen for approximately the last 10 years of his football career. Plaintiff awarded $4,000 a month in benefits for the rest of his life, with retroactivity to 1976, the year he left football. Judge also awarded plaintiff's attorney fees and costs. Case reversed on appeal.
Ahmad, et al. v. Foodmaker, Inc.; Hamburger Patty Cases (Foodmaker v. Vons)
$58,000,000.00 settlement in the Jack In The Box food poisoning case on behalf of Foodmaker Corp, the parent corporation of Jack In The Box.
County of San Diego v. RanchoVista Del Mar (De La Fuente)
A $55,000,000.00 verdict at the first trial which was the largest condemnation verdict in the history of the state at that time. Ordered on appeal for retrial, the case eventually settled for $40,000,000.00.
U.S.A./Colunga v. Hercules, Inc., et al.
The largest settlement ($55,000,000) in the history of the False Claims Act where the Government did not intervene in the action, and was larger than all the prior such settlements combined. This Qui Tam action filed in the U.S. District Court in Utah involved an action in the name of the U.S. Government for damages arising from the falsification of manufacturing and inspection records on nine solid fuel motor rocket systems [Trident I, C-4; Trident II, C-5; Titan IV, Delta, Pershing II, Sram, MX - Peacekeeper; Pegasus, and ICBM] over a ten year period.
Border Business Park v. City of San Diego
A breach of contract and inverse condemnation action against the city of San Diego resulting in a $94,500,000.00 jury verdict. Post verdict the judge granted fees and interest bringing the result for our client to above $136,000,000.00
A $7,785,131.83 jury verdict for an inverse condemnation case involving an Afghan refugee who owned the Gran Havana Cigar Company in the Gas Lamp district of San Diego. After a rags-to-riches success story following Ahmad Mesdaq's family's fleeing Afghanistan in the 1980's, the City of San Diego at the behest of developers condemned his business. A complicated case involving consolidated actions, the City actually allowed the developers to pay for the attorneys used to enforce the condemnation action. A fascinating and relevant case that illustrates just how far local government will go to pacify big money developers in the light of the recent Kelo v. New London Supreme Court ruling.
Sarka Southern, Ph.D. v. Regents of the University of California
A $1,502,106.00 jury verdict in a Third Party Beneficiary/Breach of Contract trial. Our client was Dr. Sarka Southern, Phd. A Czech immigrant, Dr. Southern was accepted at UCSD as a post-doctoral fellow in microbiology. After raising two children and studying fishing stress on dolphins and whales she realized that the stress factors she discovered could be useful in the detectioni and treatment of HIV/AIDS. After presenting her theories to UCSD they agreed to assign her a mentor so that she could receive a short-term developmental grant related to research leading to a NIMH Re-entry grant intended to help scientists who had been away from academia. Inexplicably, on May 9, 2004 Ð only four months after the grant award Ð Dr. Ellis returned the money to the NIH and informed Dr. Southern that he had done so. The given reason was that he had determined that her project was not feasible. For a month, Dr. Southern worked to reinstate the grant or find an explanation. Then, on June 10, 2004, the dean of the medical school informed Dr. Southern that neither he nor anyone else at UCSD intended to provide any further assistance. Dr. Southern was left with a year and a half of her work wasted.
A $1,187,250.00 eminent domain settlement on behalf of 26 San Marcos area homeowners. The Walnut Hills area of San Marcos is a rustic community with a country lifestyle. The North County Transit District wanted to expand rail service in the area, running a diesel train past their homes every six minutes and offered them an insulting total of $34,000.00 for ruining their rustic way of life.
People of the State of California v. Grigory Zubkis and Rimma Zubkis, et al.
$2,750,000.00 plus interest totalling $2,790,711.00 settlement for an eminent domain case involving the taking of a private residence for road expansion. Lead attorney partner Daral Mazzarella.
Morton J. Carlile and Morton J. Carlile Insurance Agency, Inc. V. Farmers Group, Inc., et al.
A $328,000.00 jury verdict in a Breach of Contract, Breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing suit brought by an insurance agent against Farmers Insurance. Lead attorney was partner Mickey McGuire with former associate James Atkins.
Mary Lynn and Warren Reichelt v. California Department of Transportation
An $89,000.00 price differential settlement on a writ of mandamus action resolving an issue where our client was relocated to an inferior neighborhood by CalTrans. Lead attorney partner Vincent J. Bartolotta with associate Karen Frostrom.
The County of San Diego v. National Quarries, Inc.
Plaintiff County of San Diego alleged that National Quarries was operating in excess of its vested rights and that its operations must be reduced.
An inverse condemnation case involving a road expansion that caused flooding and toxic mold contamination, The case eventually settled for $525,000. Lead attorney was Vincent J. Bartolotta, Jr with senior associate Karen R. Frostrom.
A condemnation case against CalTrans involving just compensation and damages to property that diminshed its fair market value. Lead attorney Vincent J. Bartolotta, Jr with senior associate Karen R. Frostrom.
Thorsnes Bartolotta McGuire
2550 Fifth Ave., 11th Floor, San Diego, CA 92103, 619-236-9363