Welcome to the Weintraub Resources section. Here, you can find our Blogs, Videos, and Podcasts, in which Weintraub attorneys regularly provide insights and updates on legal developments. You can also find upcoming Weintraub Events, as well as firm and client News.


Four Weintraub Tobin Attorneys Recognized as “Rising Stars” in Southern California

Weintraub Tobin, one of California’s leading, full-service law firms, is pleased to announce that Eric Caligiuri, Jacob Gonzales, Jessica Marlow, and Darrell White  have been named to the 2017 Southern California “Rising Stars” list. The annual publication recognizes no more than 5.0 percent of lawyers throughout Southern California.

Eric Caligiuri – Eric advises domestic and international clients through complex intellectual property disputes. Mr. Caligiuri’s practice focuses on patent and trade secret litigation in federal district courts, California state courts, and before the International Trade Commission (ITC). He has experience representing companies in a wide range of fields, including semiconductor products and processes, mobile device components and applications, networking, and systems-on-a-chip (SoC’s).

Jacob Gonzales – Jacob C. Gonzales is a shareholder with Weintraub Tobin and a member of the firm’s Litigation Practice Group. He is an experienced and respected trial attorney with expertise in a broad variety of complex legal issues. Jacob has a statewide reputation for vigorous and successful representation on both the trial and appellate levels, a reputation built by achieving stellar results for his clients.

Jessica Marlow – Jessica Marlow is a Shareholder in the firm’s Entertainment Practice. Jessica has extensive experience representing actors, writers, directors, producers, social media influencers and international financiers in connection with film, television, digital media and endorsement transactions.

Darrell White – Darrell is an associate at Weintraub Tobin, specializing in complex business litigation disputes. He also provides outside general counsel services to clients across the manufacturing, construction, and real estate industries.

About Super Lawyers
Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The annual selections are made using a patented multiphase process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, an independent research evaluation of candidates, and peer reviews by practice area. The result is a credible, comprehensive, and diverse listing of exceptional attorneys. The Super Lawyers lists are published nationwide in Super Lawyers Magazines and in leading city and regional magazines and newspapers across the country.

About Weintraub | Tobin

With offices in Los Angeles, Newport Beach, Sacramento, San Diego, and San Francisco, Weintraub Tobin is an innovative provider of sophisticated legal services to dynamic businesses and business owners, as well as non-profits and individuals with litigation and business needs. For more information on the firm, visit weintraubstage.wpengine.com.

Shareholder Shauna N. Correia to join the Legal Center Live Roadshow event series

Shareholder Shauna N. Correia will join other restaurant industry legal experts and the California Restaurant Association at the Legal Center Live Roadshow event series on May 23rd In Oakland and 25th in Santa Cruz! Seminar Topics include:

• AB 1732 – All gender sign posting requirements
• Marijuana use in restaurants
• Employment termination
• New hires & on boarding
• Immigration
• And more!

For more information about the event series, visit CRA’s webpage here: http://bit.ly/2p73EJ1

To register for the Oakland event: http://events.calrest.org/events/Oakland-CRA-Legal-Center-Live-Roadshow-3352/details

To register for the Santa Cruz event: http://events.calrest.org/events/Santa-Cruz-CRA-Legal-Center-Live-Roadshow-3355/details

IF YOU SUE FACEBOOK, WHAT’S THE LIKELIHOOD YOU’LL BE ALLOWED TO DEPOSE MARK ZUCKERBERG?

Companies are no strangers to litigation. In California, it is a cost of doing business. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for litigants to try to gain leverage in a dispute with a corporate party by attempting to depose its high-level executives to harass and embarrass them, and force the company into a quick and aberrant settlement. The strategy employed by a litigant may go like this: (1) put pressure on a company by noticing the deposition of an officer or director, (2) make clear the intent to delve not only into the high-level executive’s alleged wrongdoing, but also other points of potential embarrassment, and (3) the company will capitulate and pay a significant settlement to avoid the pain of the deposition. Some refer to this (and similar tactics) as judicial extortion. What, then, can a company and its counsel do to prevent an abusive deposition of a high-level executive?

California federal and state courts apply the “apex” doctrine to protect high-level executives, also referred to as apex executives, from harassing depositions.  In considering whether to allow the deposition of a high-level executive, courts focus on two primary factors: (1) whether the high level executive has unique first-hand, non-repetitive knowledge of facts at issue in the case, and (2) whether the party seeking the deposition has exhausted other less intrusive discovery methods. Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 282 F.R.D. 259, 263 (N.D.Cal. 2012); Mutual Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 10 Cal.App.4th 1282, 1289 (1992).

Courts understand that where an opportunity exists to game the system and harass a party it will likely be exploited, and, thus, are carful to protect against it. This was observed in one of the first cases to apply the “apex” doctrine. In 1985, a class of plaintiffs sued for personal injuries from an alleged defective design in the fuel system of the 1975 Dodge van. Plaintiffs’ counsel noticed the deposition of Lee Iacocca, then Chairman of the Board of Chrysler Corporation, claiming that statements Iacoccoa made in his recently published biography demonstrated that he had knowledge relevant to Chrysler’s alleged liability and the plaintiffs should be allowed to depose him to explore such knowledge. The court granted Iacoccoa’s motion for protective order preventing his deposition, noting: “the fact remains [Iacoccoa] is a singularly unique and important individual who can be easily subjected to unwarranted harassment and abuse. He has a right to be protected, and the courts have a duty to recognize his vulnerability.” Mulvey v. Chrsyler Corp., 106 F.R.D. 364, 366 (D.R.I. 1985).

Some chairman and officers are obvious “apex” executives – such as Iacoccoa or, say, the late Steve Jobs. See Affinity Labs of Texas v. Apple, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53649 (N.D. Cal. 2011) (court denied plaintiff’s attempt to depose Steve Jobs). However, most high level executives are not celebrities. They are not regularly quoted and their companies are not featured in the media. Yet, these less recognizable high-level executives responsible for running smaller to mid-size business are just as important to their companies as their high-profile counterparts, and equally vulnerable to harassment. Unfortunately, there is no clear definition of who qualifies for protection as an “apex” executive. Some factors that have been considered are job duties and the potential for business disruption, where the executive falls within the company’s executive hierarchy (e.g., how many people report to the executive), and the likelihood of harassment.

The most important factor considered by courts in applying the “apex” doctrine is whether the high-level executive has personal knowledge of relevant facts. Equally important is whether the information can be obtained through other less burdensome means, such as from a lower level executive or employee. When a CEO or other high-level executive lacks such personal knowledge, courts are inclined to deny their depositions.

However, the “apex” doctrine exists in tension with the otherwise broad allowance for discovery in litigation. Apple Inc., supra., 282 F.R.D. at 263. Although a deposition notice directed at a high-level executive with no personal knowledge of the facts involved should result in the issuance of a protective order denying that executive’s deposition – courts are likely to allow some manner of discovery. Now, in the case involving Apple, the court simply denied the deposition of Steve Jobs outright. But, in the matter involving Chrysler, although the court denied the deposition of Iacoccoa it allowed plaintiffs to propound written interrogatories to him. This is a less intrusive means of discovery of a high-level executive courts have allowed. See, e.g., Retail Brand Alliance, Inc. v. Factory Mut. Ins. Co., 2008 WL 622810, at *6 (SD NY 2008). Likewise, rather than  completely deny the deposition of a high-level executive, a court may limit the length or scope of the deposition to avoid harassment or undue burden. Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 282 F.R.D. 259, 265-67 (ND CA 2012) (allowing depositions of high-level officers, but limiting them to 2-3 hours each); Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., 306 F.R.D. 120, 124 (SD NY 2015) (limiting apex depositions to 4 hours).

From the outset of litigation or potential litigation, a company’s counsel must be mindful that higher-level executives are vulnerable to a deposition – particularly as a form of harassment and to gain leverage. Counsel should investigate alternative means for providing an opposing party with potentially relevant information that a high-level executive may possess, and develop a record early on establishing the limits of the high-level executive’s involvement, if any, and that such executive has no unique, personal knowledge of the relevant facts. It is important to be prepared to utilize the “apex” doctrine in order to protect against potential abuse or harassment of high-level executives.

Tara Sattler featured in Variety’s 2017 Legal Impact Report: Up Next

Weintraub Tobin’s Entertainment Associate, Tara J. Sattler, has been featured as one of the leading entertainment lawyers in Variety’s 2017 Legal Impact Report: Up Next. The report showcases the most impactful attorneys in the entertainment industry over the past year. 2017 has seen Tara represent client, Ryland Aldrich, a producer on 2017 Sundance title “L.A. Times,” as well as Kicked to the Curb Prods. and Mandy Teefey, executive producer of the new Netflix series “13 Reasons Why.”

For the full press release, visit Variety’s 2017 Legal Impact Report here: http://variety.com/gallery/legal-impact-report-2017/#!89/tara-satler/.

Tara is a Los Angeles based Entertainment attorney who specializes in representing production companies, producers, financiers and content creators in the film, television and digital spaces. Her expertise encompasses all of the phases of development, financing, production and distribution of scripted and non-scripted content for all budget levels. Tara has experience drafting and negotiating agreements to represent her clients in every stage of their entertainment industry endeavors.

Weintraub Tobin Secures $20.4 Million Jury Verdict in Orange County Superior Court

Newport Beach, CA–Late last week, Weintraub Tobin Chediak Coleman Grodin shareholders Gary A. Waldron and Sherry S. Bragg, obtained a $20.4 million dollar jury verdict in favor of client Todd Kurtin. After a decade-long legal battle, including several stops at the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Kurtin prevailed against his former business partner and real estate developer Bruce Elieff. The lawsuit – Todd Kurtin v. Bruce Elieff et al. Case No. 30-2007-00100307 – stemmed from a breach of contract arising from a 2005 settlement agreement between the parties.

Under the 2005 settlement agreement, Elieff paid approximately $26 million to Kurtin, but failed to pay the remaining sums owed, of approximately $22 million.  After filing suit, Kurtin prevailed at the first jury trial in 2010, receiving a Judgment in excess of $24 million. However, a partial new trial was ordered by now-retired Orange County Judge Nancy W. Stock to address damages, only. The Fourth District Court of Appeal confirmed the liability findings against Elieff, but upheld the trial court’s new trial ruling, and the case was sent back to the trial court for a re-determination of damages.

On March 30, after a three-week jury trial presided over by Superior Court Judge Glenda Sanders, jurors awarded $20.4 million to Kurtin for one claim of breach of contract. The verdict was a huge relief to Kurtin according to Weintraub’s Bragg:

“Mr. Kurtin is pleased with the verdict. The jury was required to sift through weeks of testimony and detailed financial information in order to calculate the damages owed to Mr. Kurtin. Thankfully, they got it right. It is unfortunate that our client had to endure a decade of litigation to get to this point. We anticipate the pre-judgment interest in this matter will substantially increase the total judgment to more than $40 million.”


About Weintraub Tobin

With offices in Los Angeles, Newport Beach, Sacramento, San Diego and San Francisco the Weintraub Tobin Chediak Coleman Grodin Law Corporation combines its shared vision and pledges to be an innovative provider of sophisticated legal services to dynamic businesses and business owners, as well as non-profits and individuals with litigation and business needs. The firm continues its long-time and strong support of the communities in which its attorneys live and work.

Weintraub Appellate Specialist, Brendan Begley, Quoted in Article Regarding Sexually Hostile Work Environment

Weintraub Tobin’s own Brendan Begley was recently quoted in a news article about an appellate court’s ruling that hugs and kisses in the workplace may create a sexually hostile environment. The article, titled “Sheriff discovers that work-hugs can lead to litigation by Laura Halleman, was published on Legal NewsLine. To read the full article, click here.

Brendan spearheads the firm’s Appeals and Writs group and is a member of the firm’s labor and employment, litigation, and trust, probate and elder abuse litigation groups. He is an Appellate Law Specialist certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.

Medicare Enrollment And Certification Legal Trends

Jeanne L. Vance contributed to a co-authored article on Medicare enrollment and certification trends that was published in the March 2017 issue of The RAP Sheet, which is a publication of the Regulation, Accreditation and Payment Practice Group of the American Health Lawyers Association.

Madoff Ponzi Scheme Case receives $20M approval from California Judge

Shareholder Marvin Gelfand is proud to announce that a California judge gave approval to a $20M settlement related to Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi Scheme. The motion was approved after 8 years of legal action dating back to 2009. Marvin Gelfand partnered up with Milberg LLP and Seeger Weiss LLP  and announced a proposed settlement with the Stanley Chais Defendants and the Chais Related Defendants in late 2016.

Read the full announcement from Law360 here: Madoff Figure’s $20M Deal With Calif., Investors OK¹d – Law360

Weintraub Tobin Supplements Commercial Litigation Ranks in Los Angeles – Andrew Gilford and Jessica Corpuz Join Thriving California Law Firm

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

LOS ANGELES (February 2, 2017) – Weintraub Tobin, one of California’s leading full-service law firms, adds long-time litigator Andrew Gilford as a shareholder and Jessica Corpuz as an associate in its Los Angeles office. The duo previously practiced with the boutique law firm of Baute Crochetiere & Gilford.

“Weintraub Tobin is pleased to kick off 2017 with these two strategic additions, which reflect our continuing efforts to attract service-oriented lawyers with serious litigation prowess across key industries prominent in the southern half of the state,” said Michael Kvarme, Weintraub’s managing shareholder. “Andy and Jessica share our deep dedication to service and have proven that they can deliver in exceeding business clients’ needs and expectations.”

With more than 25 years of experience, Gilford most recently practiced with Baute Crochetiere & Gilford, which he joined in July 2012. Before landing at the boutique, he was a career-long partner with Alston & Bird in Los Angeles and, prior to that, Weston Benshoof, which merged with Alston in 2008. Gilford has extensive experience handling complex business and commercial disputes, and he has tried cases involving intellectual property rights, contract and fraud claims stemming from a large-scale real estate development, contract and business tort claims, and product defect and warranty claims in the power and energy space, as well as insurance coverage matters. Experienced in both federal and state courts, he has defended consumer class action claims on behalf of nutritional supplements retailers and manufacturers under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and he has also handled appellate matters.

Gilford earned his J.D. from University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Law (1989) and his B.S., cum laude, also from UCLA (1986).

Corpuz has experience with high-stakes litigation on behalf of both plaintiffs and defendants in matters involving complex business disputes, including tort, fraud, IP and contract claims. She was a member of the trial team responsible for a $21 million verdict in a 2012 breach of contract action and alter ego judgment. Corpuz has also handled appellate matters and obtained a published California Court of Appeal decision interpreting the state’s False Claims Act. She holds a J.D. from Loyola Law School (2011) and a B.A from University of California, Santa Barbara (2008).

About Weintraub Tobin
With offices in Los Angeles, Newport Beach, Sacramento, San Diego and San Francisco the Weintraub Tobin Chediak Coleman Grodin Law Corporation combines its shared vision and pledges to be an innovative provider of sophisticated legal services to dynamic businesses and business owners, as well as non-profits and individuals with litigation and business needs. The firm continues its long-time and strong support of the communities in which its attorneys live and work.

#   #   #