SAN DIEGO
Volume 197, 2020 $6.95
5 Reasons Why Hiring a Sales Professional Will Benefit Your Firm
Jim Cranston
How to Implement Videos into Your Marketing Strategy
Amy Williams
Your Firm Was Hacked—Now What?
Kevin Studley
The 3 Main Reasons for Using LinkedIn
Nancy Myrland California Case Summaries
Monty A. McIntyre
20 Steps to Avoid Employment Lawsuits
Kelly Scott
Law Firm of the Month
Bienert | Katzman PC
A Boutique Trial Firm with a National Powerhouse Punch
A history of
strength For 73 years we have fought for justice on behalf of our clients, with the experience and resources necessary to tackle the most challenging and complex litigation. Our stellar national reputation has been earned through strength, perseverance and determination to make a powerful and positive difference in the lives of our clients.
www.caseygerry.com/strength Dedicated to the pursuit of justice since 1947. SERIOUS PERSONAL INJURY, AUTOMOBILE, MARITIME, TRUCKING, AVIATION, PRODUCT LIABILITY, SEXUAL ABUSE, AND CONSUMER CLASS ACTIONS
We appreciate your business and wish you a Happy Holiday and Prosperous 2020!
W W W. J I L I O R YA N . C O M
800.454.1230
2020 EDITION—NO.197
TABLE OF CONTENTS 6 Your Firm Was Hacked— Now What? by Kevin Studley
8 Twenty Steps to Avoid Employment Lawsuits by Kelly Scott
6
EXECUTIVE PUBLISHER Brian Topor EDITOR Wendy Price
10 Community News 12 The 3 Main Reasons for Using LinkedIn
CREATIVE SERVICES Penn Creative
by Nancy Myrland
CIRCULATION Angela Watson
LAW FIRM OF THE MONTH
PHOTOGRAPHY Chris Griffiths STAFF WRITERS Dan Baldwin Jennifer Hadley CONTRIBUTING EDITORIALISTS Jim Cranston Monty A. McIntyre Nancy Myrland Kelly Scott Kevin Studley Amy Williams WEBMASTER Mariusz Opalka ADVERTISING INQUIRIES Info@AttorneyJournals.com SUBMIT AN ARTICLE Editorial@AttorneyJournals.com OFFICE 30211 Avenida De Las Banderas Suite 200 Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 www.AttorneyJournals.com ADDRESS CHANGES Address corrections can be made via fax, email or postal mail.
16 Bienert | Katzman PC Boutique Trial Firm with a National Powerhouse Punch
16
by Dan Baldwin
22 Create and Implement Videos into Your Marketing Strategy by Amy Williams
24 California Case Summaries by Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.
28 Five Reasons Why Hiring a Sales Professional Will Benefit Your Firm by Jim Cranston
24
Editorial material appears in Attorney Journals as an informational service for readers. Article contents are the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of Attorney Journals. Attorney Journals makes every effort to publish credible, responsible advertisements. Inclusion of product advertisements or announcements does not imply endorsement. Attorney Journals is a trademark of Sticky Media, LLC. Not affiliated with any other trade publication or association. Copyright 2020 by Sticky Media, LLC. All rights reserved. Contents may not be reproduced without written permission from Sticky Media, LLC. Printed in the USA
NEVADA REFERRAL & CO-COUNSEL RELATIONSHIPS
“Rick is one of the best lawyers in the country. I call him every time I have any issue in Nevada and would not hesitate to refer him any type of case of any size.” ~ C. Michael Alder, Esq., Alder Law, Los Angeles, California CAALA Past President and Former Trial Lawyer of the Year
NEVADA’S LARGEST & HIGHEST RATED INJURY LAW FIRM
801 SOUTH 4TH STREET | LAS VEGAS, NV 89101
Your Firm Was
HACKED Now What? by Kevin Studley
I
t looked like just another notice from your law firm’s IT guy— probably another computer system update. Your administrative assistant didn’t ponder it long, just clicked on the link to get the busywork over with. But looks can be deceiving, and that’s what cybercriminals are counting on. With one click on a fraudulent link, any employee can ignite a dumpster fire of damage that breaches the data in your files, reveals personal information of your clients, or paralyzes every aspect of your business until you pay the criminals a ransom. With cybercrime escalating worldwide, is your firm doing enough to minimize your vulnerability?
Risks Become Routine Unfortunately, dealing with cyberthreats is part of doing business for organizations of all sizes and specialties. According to the FBI, the costs of dealing with cybercrime doubled to $2.7 billion between 2017 and 2018. And recently, CNBC reported that the average cyberattack now costs $200,000, with 43 percent of cyberattack victims being small businesses that may be hardpressed to take a hit of that magnitude. One small slip-up by a busy employee or executive can leave your firm wide open for cyberattack. An August 2019 story in The New York Times cited the experience of a city employee of Allentown, Pennsylvania, who was using a laptop while on a routine business trip. While traveling, he happened to miss a software update. After he clicked on a “phishing” email sent by Ukraine-based hackers, he unwittingly allowed malware to spread on computers throughout his office. It cost the city more than $1 million to clean up the damage. Even digital giant Facebook has not been immune from attack. In 2018, it disclosed that a data breach had allowed illicit access to 30 million accounts. Selling people’s data is a lucrative prospect, so it’s clear that cybercrime is not going away. Other corporations, municipalities and hospital systems have been paralyzed by ransomware attacks. It’s a more common threat to law firms than you might think. In these attacks, hackers target a firm’s digital systems to paralyze functions such as records, email 6
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
and other services. Then they hold the firm hostage, saying they won’t free up the software unless they’re paid off. Some other common types of cyberattacks are: • Stolen passwords. Phishing emails trick people into going to websites where they’re asked to enter their usernames and passwords. The sites look authentic enough – but they’re fake and give hackers access to a wealth of company and/or personal information. • Social engineering. Similarly, a phishing email is sent to employees and it looks like it comes from someone within the organization. It will ask for sensitive information such as passwords. • Phony hyperlinks and attachments. Again, they may look legitimate. But when someone clicks on the link or opens the attachment, they give hackers an inroad to their computer system. • Spamming. Spam emails might look like helpful ads for beauty products or cheery promises of free stuff. But they can trick people into providing personal information, which can be sold on the black market. • Hacked versions of software. Fake versions of legitimate software (such as an online meeting program) let cybercriminals lift data or lock down office computers. • Malicious mobile apps and downloads. Mobile devices can pose risks, with so many people doing business on their smartphones. An employee who OKs permissions for a malicious app can give hackers access to sensitive company data.
Risks for Law Firms Law firms handle a lot of information that hackers could find attractive. Firm files contain protected information on clients and employees, such as sensitive personal and professional data that they are trusting the firm to keep confidential. A February 2017 data breach at the international law firm Jenner & Block affected tax
forms for hundreds of its current and former employees, potentially exposing data including addresses and Social Security numbers. Also at risk from a cyberattack is information gathered for use in the litigation process—a possible threat to law firms of any size. This data might include material that could come out later in court, as well as information meant to be used during negotiations. Financial implications of cybercrime for law firms can be significant. One possible scenario: Hackers access a list of a law firm’s creditors, then send them bogus bills offering to settle for lower payoffs if they’ll ante up a partial amount. There can be longer-term financial fallout, as well. A firm that suffers a serious breach will lose some established clients and may have trouble attracting new ones, especially those with stringent security requirements.
Consider Best Practices How do law firms handle potential threats? A sprawling multinational firm will have entire departments and divisions dedicated to cybersecurity. But firms with fewer than 200 employees often follow a traditional model that’s much simpler. Typically, they will employ an information technology (IT) manager, plus another employee who provides desktop support. Often that means there’s no one solely dedicated to cybersecurity. IT managers are good at solving technical problems in your computer system, but they tend to lack expertise at anticipating cyber threats and reducing or eliminating risks. That’s a drawback when it comes to designing effective cybersecurity, especially because law firms need multiple layers of protection. As an analogy, compare it to how you secure your home. You don’t simply install a deadbolt lock. You also have other strategies: an alarm system, a link to police, fencing. You might get a watchdog. An ideal security plan will involve multiple measures designed to keep the bad guys out. Cybersecurity protection is similar. Strategies might include network scans, encryption, spam filters, antivirus software, automated controls, access restriction, staff training, malware defenses and more. Having multiple defenses is a better way to keep the cybercriminals out.
Assessing Risks As with a health checkup, law firms can benefit from a cybersecurity evaluation—whether the firm has already been victimized or is just trying to prevent it. For help conducting a cybersecurity evaluation, look for a company that has undergone a Service Organization Control (SOC) audit and has experience working with law firms. The company you choose should analyze systems based on the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) framework. NIST is an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce. It outlines a methodical approach to cybersecurity with five basic functions: identify, protect, detect, respond and recover. Factors to be evaluated will cover security policies, automated security measures, efficiency of IT updates and staff training programs. Your cybersecurity status will be rated on a scale of 0 to 5. For most firms, a low ranking is an eye-opener and even a little
scary. The upside, however, is that you’ll learn what you can to do reduce risks.
Time to Take Action Common-sense strategies will include improving email security. For instance, you might be advised to strengthen password protocols, install a spam filter, and set up a reliable antivirus app on both desktop and mobile devices. More broadly, consider outsourcing your cybersecurity management, since it could be more cost-effective than hiring a cybersecurity staff. In fact, if you are seeking clients in certain sectors, such as military or government agencies, outsourcing cybersecurity may be required to get and keep their business. The cost typically will range from $2,000 to $5,000 per month. With a cybersecurity partner, you’ll agree on a system of policies and controls to be implemented at regular intervals. The schedule might look something like this: • Annually: IT security planning, risk assessment, review of requirements and cybersecurity budget planning. • Quarterly: Security leadership meeting, review of vulnerabilities, updates on training that’s been done and what is needed. • Monthly: Remediation project management to suggest further improvements, and an exercise such as testing with a simulated phishing attack. • Daily and Weekly: Monitoring network traffic. While automated measures are important, informed employees are a key line of defense. They’ll need training and reminders to be alert for scams, spot possible hacking attempts, and most important, to refrain from clicking on those suspicious links.
Don’t Be a Victim Well-publicized victims of cybercrime have included organizations ranging from entertainment conglomerates to universities to political parties. Just because it hasn’t happened to your firm yet, don’t be lulled into complacency. Your law firm could be a target, too, putting your operations and finances at risk, not to mention your firm’s reputation. While no one is 100 percent immune from cyberattack, there’s a lot law firms can do to safeguard the security of the firm, clients, records and employees. The best strategy is to implement layers of security measures to discourage cybercriminals before they break through your defenses. Sadly, for someone else, there’s always a “softer target” to which they can turn their malicious attention. n Kevin Studley is the president of The Network Pro, Inc. a Californiabased Managed IT and Security company that specializes in the legal vertical. The Network Pro is recognized as a growth company on the Inc. 5000 fastest growing companies list, a Great Place to Work by the OCBJ, and has placed on the Top 501 Managed Services Providers list for the last seven years. Kevin Studley is an active and long-standing member of Vistage and actively participates in events that promote the business community. For more information, visit www.thenetworkpro.net or call 714-333-9620. Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
7
20 Steps to Avoid Employment Lawsuits by Kelly Scott
I
have been asked by more than one frustrated California employer how to avoid or reduce employment lawsuits. It is not an easy question to answer, as there are many variables that go into generating employment law claims. However, in no particular order, what follows is a list of strategies and steps to consider implementing an effective claim reduction plan: 1. Document, document, document: Documenting employee issues and the employer’s response is a big part of disproving claims. Indeed, a consistent practice of documenting issues can even be used to indicate that something did not happen through the lack of documentation. 2. Arbitration agreements: Having arbitration agreements with employees improves the efficiency of dispute resolution and generally reduces the impact and frequency of claims. 3. Employee handbook: Having a good employee handbook that is updated each year is a big part of reducing claims. The law changes frequently; make sure you change with it. 4. Employment forms and posters: Make sure the forms you use are up to date and that required posters and pamphlets are current. These need to be updated every year or so. 5. Know the handbook: You would be surprised how many employers do not follow their own policies. It is a lot to ask of California employers to be aware of all the nuances of California law, but reading and applying the handbook is a good place to start. 6. Human resources training: Having a good human resources director is a good start, but that person needs to stay on top of legal developments and strategies. 7. Compliance audits: Payroll practices, overtime and bonus payments, commission practices and agreements, salaries and pay rates, hiring practices, background checks, exemptions from overtime, record keeping, I-9 forms, retirement plans, leave practices, disability issues, OSHA compliance, information security, and HIPAA compliance are all areas that can be examined by professionals with expertise. 8. Background checks: While an employer’s options in terms of requiring a post-offer, pre-employment credit check 8
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
are limited by the duties of the position, nothing prohibits employers from doing other types of background searches, including reviewing litigation records and publicly available Internet postings. Employers are required to provide a copy of any document obtained which is relied upon for an employment decision. In addition, there are specific disclosures and communications required for use of criminal records. 9. Performance reviews: Having useful performance reviews is a big part of effectively managing employees, which is a key component to reducing claims. Performance reviews should be checked for accuracy and completeness by someone other than the reviewing supervisor. Criteria used for the review should be updated periodically. Further, whenever possible, the criteria should emphasize objective rather than subjective standards. Input should be sought from other supervisors to make sure that a consensus is reached. 10. Disciplinary actions: Discipline needs to be consistent, fair and reasonable. Always document any disciplinary issue. 11. Review the file: Before any termination decision is finalized, the personnel file of that person should be reviewed to make sure that there is enough basis for the termination and that there is nothing in the file that would cause concern. 12. Effective investigations: Make sure that at least human resources are trained on workplace investigation standards and practices. 13. Avoid delay: In many ways, delay or tolerance is an employer’s enemy. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard a plaintiff’s lawyer claim that the fact that an employer put up with an issue for a lengthy period meant that the issue was not a problem. Do not put off dealing with violations of policies or standards. 14. Monitor morale: Employee morale can be a good indication of a potential for claims. The worse the morale, the more likely that claims will be filed. If there is a morale problem, find out what it is and take steps to deal with it. 15. Practice follow-up: Once any problem is dealt with, check on it with decreasing frequency over time and
document the effort. This will make sure that the issue has been solved and will also serve to prove your efforts as a good and conscientious employer. 16. Train supervisors: Supervisors need to know how to handle not just discrimination and harassment issues, but other employee management issues as well. Performance reviews, discipline, dealing with absences and leaves issues, and knowing when there might be a disability issue are important parts of every supervisor’s job. Supervisors also must know how to take a complaint and when to report issues to human resources. 17. Consider severance agreements: Severance agreements can be a powerful tool to prevent claims, but you must know when to use them. 18. Monitor computer use: Employers should have effective policies limiting the use of computers and making clear that employees should have no expectation of privacy when using computers. These policies must be enforced on a regular basis. Put simply, you can learn a lot from the use or misuse of a company computer. 19. Check expenses: Make sure that you have an effective policy on all types of employee expenses and that you are reimbursing employees for all expenses and verifying such expenses. Cell phones, automobiles, computers and supplies
or equipment are all expense traps for employers that can add up to a big problem if not handled properly. 20. Make it easy to address complaints: Having an opendoor policy is one thing; appreciating and enforcing it is quite another. Complaints represent an opportunity to deal with a problem or potential problem. Employers should therefore welcome the opportunity to take a complaint. More importantly, the attitude that complaints are welcome should permeate the workplace. In sum, all California employers are to some extent vulnerable to employment lawsuits, whether frivolous or not. The truth is that California, which has more employment laws than any other state, has created a playing field that is just not fair to California employers. However, taking these steps can help to reduce claims and to minimize the impact of claims when they come. n Kelly Scott is a partner and head of the firm’s Employment Law Department. Mr. Scott is also a member of the Litigation Department and has practiced law since 1987. His areas of practice include representation of employers in all types of employment matters, including class actions, wrongful termination, sexual harassment, employment discrimination and harassment, retaliation, wage and hour claims and advice and/or training for compliance with various employment laws.
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
9
COMMUNITY news n CaseyGerry managing partner David S. Casey Jr. was awarded the 2019 Hughes McClenahan award for civility in the practice of law by the San Diego Chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA) at the organization’s annual holiday gala, on Saturday. December.14 at the La Jolla Country Club. DAVID S. CASEY JR. An invitation-only national legal association, ABOTA is committed to the preservation and promotion of the civil jury trial and comprised of the country’s leading judges and trial lawyers. The prestigious Hughes McClenahan award is ABOTA’s highest honor for San Diego legal practicioners/lawyers. It was named after Peter Hughes, a leader in the San Diego legal community for decades, and George McClenahan, a founding partner of Casey McClenahan—a predecessor to CaseyGerry. According to CaseyGerry partner Frederick Schenk, who currently serves on ABOTA’s executive board, CaseyGerry has a longstanding tradition of ABOTA involvement, with five of its partners included in their membership. “We are proud of our enduring affiliation with ABOTA and are especially honored that the ABOTA selection committee unanimously chose our managing partner for this important accolade.” n San Diego-based DuFord Law, a boutique law firm that provides legal services for small businesses and corporations, as well as employment litigation, announced today the appointment of Kendra Wilbur as chief operating officer. This announcement comes on the heels of DuFord Law’s expansion into Phoenix and Las Vegas, KENDRA WILBUR as well as the company’s two-year anniversary. As Chief Operating Officer, Wilbur oversees all DuFord Law business operations. She is responsible for establishing and implementing company processes and policies, maintaining company culture, increasing productivity and efficiency, and spearheading employee hiring, training and development. Wilbur brings 13 years of operations and HR experience to her new role. She began working with DuFord Law in as consultant earlier in 2019. Prior to that, Wilbur spent 12 years at Target where she held a variety of leadership roles. Wilbur is a graduate of SDSU, where she earned her degree in Business Administration.
n Antonyan Miranda is proud to welcome experienced law firm executive Karen Lemmon as the firm’s new Finance Manager. Lemmon, who has served in executive roles in local law firms since 2005, is a Certified Legal Manager, a designation earned through the Association of Legal Administrators (ALA) that recognizes “mastery of the KAREN LEMMON core areas of knowledge identified as essential to the effective performance of a principal administrator.” She earned a Juris Doctor degree from Thomas Jefferson School of Law, and as a law student, served as a judicial intern for the Hon. Wesley R. Mason. She also became a Certified Legal Intern, permitting her to appear in court representing clients in dependency, juvenile, and criminal courts. Lemmon was also court-appointed mediator at the South County Courthouse. “We are proud to welcome Karen Lemmon to the firm as our Finance Manager,” said Timothy Miranda, Antonyan Miranda Co-Founder. “She is a leader in the legal community, and she brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to our firm. We are confident that Karen will contribute to our continued success.” n FordHarrison LLP, one of the country’s largest management-side labor and employment law firms, is pleased to announce Cory J. King joins as Partner. Cory comes to FordHarrison from Fine, Boggs & Perkins LLP. “Cory is an accomplished attorney who understands his clients’ needs and provides excellent service,” said Al McKenna, FordHarrison Managing Partner. “California is an exciting growth market for the firm, and Cory is a big part of our plan to support and continue that growth.” Cory is a seasoned litigator representing employers in private arbitration and litigation claims before state and federal courts, as well as administrative proceedings before state and federal agencies. His extensive litigation experience includes developing creative and efficient approaches to defending wage/hour (including class action and PAGA claims), harassment, discrimination, wrongful termination, whistleblower, breach of contract, unfair competition, and trade secret disputes.v“I am excited to be a part of FordHarrison’s continuing expansion in California,” said Cory. “I am thrilled to start this new journey in San Diego building on FordHarrison’s reputation and global platform.”
Have a Press Release you would like to submit for our Community News? Email it to PR@AttorneyJournals.com
10
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
Arizona Referral & Co-Counsel Relationships ONE OF ARIZONA’S LARGEST CONSUMER LAW FIRMS
Kurt Maahs Attorney
Phillips Law Group, P.C.
Timothy Tonkin Attorney
Phillips Law Group, P.C.
kurtm@phillipslaw.com Text Jeffrey with any Arizona Law questions.
Attorney
Phillips Law Group, P.C.
timt@phillipslaw.com
(619) 252-4829
Since 1993. Over 145,000 Clients Served.
Phoenix, Tucson and all of Arizona. Generous Referral Fees Paid.
(800) 706-3000
The 3 Main Reasons for Using LinkedIn by Nancy Myrland
H
ow many times have you gone to an event, maybe a conference or a business after hours, or even just a social event with friends, and a new acquaintance sends you an invitation to connect on LinkedIn? You might have seen the notice in a LinkedIn email or on the app itself. Maybe you collected that person’s business card. I know, I know, business cards aren’t used as much as they used to be, but they do still exist. What happens after that? What happens to those LinkedIn invitations to connect? Maybe you aren’t sure whether to accept or ignore, or whether you should personalize your responses (you should). Maybe you’ve even turned off the notification emails in your LinkedIn settings so you have no idea you are receiving these invitations until weeks later when you decide to log in. How about those business cards? What happens to them? Most of the time, absolutely nothing. I have to tell you, I have a few stacks of them on my desk. I throw them away every few years or so, the most recent being this morning. There are always a few I just can’t throw away because they were given to me by people who became very special friends to me. From a business card to a special friend … who knew?!
Is This a Hobby or Your Business? Let’s say you get far enough to click accept when this person you met sends you that LinkedIn invitation to connect. Then what? You’ve only just begun. If you and I don’t do anything with these contacts after that acceptance to connect or that exchange of business cards, then all we have is a hobby of collecting contacts and that’s not good use of our time. It helps to look back to a quote that Jeff Weiner said at a press event a long time ago. Jeff is the CEO of LinkedIn. He said: “LinkedIn is about connecting talent with opportunity at massive scale. We’re not just talking about the tools to enable people to find their dream jobs. We’re also talking about tools that enable people to be great at the jobs that they already have.” • Connecting. • Opportunity. • Be great. 12
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
Yes, indeed. I chose this quote because part of being great at our jobs is connecting with people.
3 Main Reasons for Using LinkedIn Jeff’s quote flows nicely into what I define as the three main reasons for using LinkedIn. When you think about it, his quote flows nicely into using any of the social networks, but it’s extremely important on LinkedIn. The 3 Main Reasons to Use LinkedIn Are: 1. To find those with whom you want to do business, 2. To be found by the people you want to do business with, and 3. The most important of them all is to turn contacts into connections.
Why Should You Turn Contacts into Connections on LinkedIn? As I mentioned above, a contact is just that, a contact. It’s like a name on a piece of paper thrown into a fishbowl or a basket just waiting to be picked. That name on that piece of paper could sit there for years, but it’s more likely it will be thrown away if it is not chosen. It is when we take our contacts to the next step and even further that we have the opportunity to make true connections with those human beings. • When we connect, we begin to form relationships. • When we form relationships, we learn about one another. • When we learn about one another, we decide if we want to get to know them. • When we get to know them, we come to trust them. • When we come to trust them, we learn to like or respect them, and hopefully both. All of this is what leads to more lasting business relationships. Knowing, liking, and trusting others are the steppingstones that turn our contacts into connections.
How Do You Turn Contacts into Real Connections? We have to remember a very important rule, which is that it takes proper care and feeding in order to create and grow a true connection. We can’t just join these networks. We have to actually use them. When we use them effectively, we are giving people more of us. • A piece of us • Our helpful attitude • Our ability to talk about what they’re sharing on LinkedIn • Our ability to help give perspective to a conversation or situation being discussed on LinkedIn • Our ability to send them a private message every once in a while, to say I’m thinking about you, how is this going, or maybe to let them know something is brewing • …or our desire to show we care by sharing their content on LinkedIn The more we do that, the greater the chances are that we will turn these mere contacts into true connections.
Is It Possible? Is There Enough Time? Yes, it is possible, but it is better to do it now while you have a manageable network because the day might come when you have hundreds and thousands of contacts and find this kind of personal interaction with all of your contacts difficult to scale. You might already have that many. If so, you need to make sure you are prioritizing these activities with those connections who are most important to you and your growth. To be present on LinkedIn and to engage in the practices I am suggesting, you should plan on spending a little bit of time on LinkedIn on a regular basis. When you are active by doing what it takes to turn contacts into connections, this helps LinkedIn’s algorithms see you as a valuable member, which helps you and your content to be shown in the newsfeed. That’s a good thing because that algorithm is what helps surface your content to those people with whom you want to do business. In case you didn’t know this, all of the social media sites show our content to those we interact with the most. If we don’t interact with them, and vice versa, we might never see their content, and they might never see ours.
Faith-Based Strategy When it comes to creating true relationships, you can’t have a faith-based strategy. What does that mean? It means that you can’t just throw
a bunch of stuff out there, meaning a bare-bones LinkedIn profile and a little bit of content, or brag about what you’ve done and what’s wonderful lately about your practice and your firm, and have faith that everybody’s going to be attracted to you. That’s not how it works. It’s easy to sign up for LinkedIn or any social networking site. It just takes a minute. It’s what we do on LinkedIn after we sign up that determines whether it will help with business development. As I mentioned, you need to get in there and make comments on people’s content. Be helpful. Connect.
Is LinkedIn Networking Similar to In-Person Networking? LinkedIn networking is very similar to what you do in person. When you meet someone face-to-face, you need to engage that person in conversation in order to develop a relationship, don’t you? Of course, if people aren’t ready for a certain level of discussion, you have to use your intuition and your gut feeling about what’s appropriate. It is the same for LinkedIn. You have to interact with others if you want them to interact with you.
Don’t Forget Don’t forget your three reasons for being on LinkedIn: 1. To find the people with whom you want to do business 2. To be found by the people with whom you want to do business 3. To turn contacts into connections. Also, a reminder of a few of the ways we discussed that you can turn contacts into connections: • Share yourself with others • Have a helpful attitude in everything you do on LinkedIn • Comment on what others have shared on LinkedIn • Add your perspective to others’ comments, posts, and discussions • Send a private message every once in a while, to let someone know you are thinking about them, or if there is something they need to know about. Wait for it, though. Most people on LinkedIn don’t care for private messages from people they barely know. n Nancy Myrland is the founder of Myrland Marketing & Social Media. She specializes in Marketing, Business Development, Content, Social and Digital Media Speaker, Trainer and Advisor to lawyers, legal marketers and law firms, specializing in helping you grow your firm and your practice through the understanding, creation, and integration of marketing and strategic plans with content, social and digital media. To learn more, please visit www.MyrlandMarketing.com.
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
13
TOP 1% OF CALIFORNIA’S
MOST SUCCESSFUL FIRE LAW FIRMS
We represent thousands of individuals all over the State of California and have recovered over $750,000,000 on behalf of our clients. We have the experience and the resources to handle any complex case. WHY PARTNER WITH OR REFER CASES TO SINGLETON LAW FIRM? 1. We Put Clients First 2. We Have Unmatched Experience Litigating Against Utility Companies
3. We Have the Necessary Resources To Maximize Results For Our Clients
*Generous Referral Fees paid consistent with State Bar Rules
Singleton Law Firm 450 A Street, 5th Floor, San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 771-3473 | info@slffirm.com 8 ADDITIONAL OFFICES LOCATED THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA: VENTURA, SAN FRANCISCO, SACRAMENTO, SANTA ROSA, MENDOCINO, CLEARLAKE, BUTTE & CALAVERAS
14
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
GOING TO TRIAL – NEED EXPERIENCED HELP?
SPECIALIZING IN BET-THE-COMPANY CASES OVER 65 YEARS OF COMBINED EXPERIENCE REFERRALS/SUBSTITUTIONS ACCEPTED AT ALL STAGES OF LITIGATION, INCLUDING TRIAL • Complete defense jury verdict in real estate dispute and more than $400,000 collected for attorneys’ fees and costs in Batter v. McElhinney, et al. (2019)(Jason Kirby). • $2.1 million jury verdict for firm client in Doe v. San Diego Unified School District, et al. (2018)(Jason Kirby & Michael Kirby). • $1.1 million arbitration award for firm clients on cross-complaint after zeroing plaintiff on $6 million damage claim in Step Strategy Advisors v. Solid Gold Health Products for Pets, Inc., et al. (2018)(Jason Kirby lead counsel). • Michael Kirby received the 2019 Best Lawyers in America® distinction for (1) Bet-the-Company Litigation, (2) Commercial Litigation, (3) Litigation – Real Estate, and (4) Litigation – Securities.
501 West Broadway | Suite 1720 | San Diego, CA 92101 | 619-487-1500 | www.kirbyandkirbylaw.com
Boutique Trial Firm With a
National Powerhouse Punch “I think it’s unusual to find lawyers with our background and qualifications at a small firm. Our clients have the benefit of working with leaders in our respective fields of practice where they get direct attention from the lawyers they retain. In short, our clients get the best of both worlds,” says Steven J. Katzman, Partner, Bienert | Katzman PC. Katzman’s partner, Thomas H. Bienert, Jr. echoes that statement. “We are as good as any firm of any size when it comes to trial and litigation. But we’re more efficient and more cost-effective than most because of our boutique size and structure.” Bienert founded the firm in 2000. Katzman joined him in 2008. Today their organization is one of Southern California’s top trial boutique firms and a leader in complex trials and litigation, bankruptcy and white-collar criminal defense. The firm’s civil practice has obtained multi-milliondollar plaintiff and zero-dollar defense verdicts, and several successful asset recovery investigations, judgments and collections, with results often surpassing the tens of millions of dollars. Firm attorneys include the former United States Trustee for five federal judicial districts; Chief of the Orange County office of the United States Attorney and Associate Independent Counsel in Washington, D.C, Chief of the Los Angeles Trial Unit for the Federal Public Defender’s Office; federal prosecutors, federal public defenders and law clerks. In relatively few years they have handled a surprisingly large number of high-profile cases, including matters involving Bernie Madoff, Anna Nicole Smith, the Varsity Blues case, the Backpage criminal cases, NBA star James Harden, the FDIC in Washington Mutual Receivership, and whistleblower claims against fortune 400 company, Celgene. The firm has 24 employees: 12 attorneys (including six partners, one of counsel, one senior counsel and four Associates) and four paralegals. The awareness generated by their high-profile cases and ongoing reputation for excellence in representing a broad range of clients has 16
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
created a need for expansion. Bienert | Katzman recently opened an office in Los Angeles to meet the additional client needs. Katzman says, “Because Tom and I have such varied experiences and we have tried so many different types of cases, we’re in a position to handle any sort of trial case—from white collar criminal, bankruptcy, significant personal injury, whistleblower cases, and complex litigation—we’ve successfully handled all of them.”
© christopher TODD studios JOURNALS
LAW FIRM
OF THE MONTH
2020
A Heritage of Public Service and a Commitment to Helping People The motivation to become attorneys and later to become partners comes in large part from growing up in environments where they saw and experienced first-hand the difficult and sometimes seemingly overwhelming challenges in life and in facing the legal system.
Bienert, the son of a young, single mother in New Orleans, learned the lesson of responsibility early, needing to do a lot on his own while his mom worked long hours as a legal secretary. Visiting her at her office allowed him to meet many attorneys and see some of them first-hand in court. “I was fascinated with the courtroom and the proceedings there: the formality of the proceedings, the colloquy between the judge and attorneys, the drama in the questioning of witnesses and arguments to the jury, the chance to do something in court to help people. I knew before I graduated high school that I wanted to be a trial attorney.” Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
17
© christopher TODD studios
Partner - Steven J. Katzman
He attended LSU undergrad and earned his J.D. from Tulane Law School. His admissions include the Louisiana Supreme Court, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Supreme Court of California, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, and the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Bienert is a member of the Orange County Bar Association, Orange County Criminal Defense Bar Association, Federal Bar Association, and the Southern California Regional Subcommittee. His professional achievements include: AV Preeminent Rated by Martindale-Hubbell since 2002, selected to the Super Lawyers® list every year since 2006, selected to the Best Lawyers® list every year since 2009, recognized as one of the National Trial Lawyers “Top 100 Trial Lawyers” every year 18
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
since 2011, named Orange County’s “White-Collar Lawyer of the Year” for 2011 by Best Lawyers®, repeatedly recognized as one of the “Top 50 Lawyers in Orange County” by Super Lawyers®, selected among “America’s Top 100 High Stakes Litigators®”, received the Lifetime Achievement Award by “America’s Top 100 Attorneys®”, and recognized as one of “America’s Top 100®” Civil Defense Litigators for Southern California. Katzman is the son of an immigrant holocaust survivor who came to the United States in 1958 with only $50 in his pocket. “My father taught me the truth of seeking the American dream and the value of a good work ethic,” he says. The first member of his family to attend college, he majored in Economics at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and received his law degree from the University of California, Davis. “I did not anticipate that I would become a federal prosecutor or trial attorney, but I was motivated to do so by the fraud and abuse I personally witnessed in private practice following my clerkship,” he says. He is admitted to practice in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, and the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. His professional accomplishments include: Orange County Bankruptcy Forum, President, 2012, California Bankruptcy Forum, Educational Chair 2012, Conference Co-Chair, selected to the Best Lawyers® list every year since 2013, selected to the Super Lawyers® list every year since 2015, selected by Best Lawyers® as Orange County’s 2013 “Litigation-Bankruptcy” Lawyer of the Year, and he is a frequent speaker at many national and regional legal associations, including the American Bankruptcy Institute, the National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges, the National Association of Bankruptcy Trustees, the California State Bar, and the Justice Department’s national training facilities. The future partners commenced on a long path of public service, working together as federal prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the 1990s, and then on various cases in private practice the early 2000s.
A Result-Oriented Approach Katzman says, “When a client comes to us, they do so because they have a problem and they need that problem fixed. We take a holistic approach to
© christopher TODD studios
resolving matters. There are a lot of external variables that come into play.” He says the attorneys look at the various moving parts of a case to figure out what is the best solution to reach their client’s objectives at the lowest reasonable cost. Bienert | Katzman is no stranger to controversial cases. The term “whistleblower” has been in the news recently and it is a topic familiar to the attorneys. They have been handling such cases and have developed an expertise in that highly controversial legal arena. One recent case involved a strong and principled woman who became a whistleblower after seeing a large pharmaceutical company conduct business practices that later were found to be against the law. She took action and made complaints and those complaints were brought to the government’s attention. The government declined to take the case and handed the matter over to Bienert | Katzman and two other firms on the East Coast. The case went straight to litigation. The woman’s name was made public, she was deposed, and she was a participant in various proceedings. The company she exposed was represented by two multi-national law firms staffed with very experienced and capable lawyers, but on the eve of trial the firm struck a successful settlement. Bienert says, “I think that one reason the case resolved successfully was because the collection of the two very small practices on the east coast along with our (at the time) 12-person trial shop was an opponent that the defendant company and their counsel recognized was equally good. They realized there was a serious risk of losing, so they settled the case fairly instead of continuing to go to trial.” This $280 million settlement is the second largest recovery ever recorded in a false claims act case litigated by a private party. Other interesting, and often controversial, cases successfully handled by Bienert | Katzman include: Exposing serious prosecutorial misconduct in a tax fraud case brought against a prominent oncologist in Alaska, leading to the removal of the prosecution team. The government subsequently dismissed all five felony charges in exchange for a plea to a single misdemeanor with no jail time, no fine, and no restitution; Obtaining a dismissal of all charges after trial against a former employee of a substance abuse treatment facility charged with second degree murder and dependent adult abuse when a patient of the facility died. After a nearly four-week trial, the team secured a jury vote of 10-2 in favor of acquittal, leading to the government dismissing the charges not only against their client but against related co-defendants who had not yet gone to trial.
Partner - Thomas “Tom” H. Bienert, Jr.
Representing the liquidating trustee of a luxury resort, asserting claims for fraudulent transfer and securing more than $200 million in damages and approximately $100,000 in sanctions. Katzman says, “We have the ability to work on high-level, interesting and controversial matters and are up to the challenges presented in such cases. Because we are well regarded in the legal community and have credibility with the courts and opposing counsel, our positions are given serious consideration.”
Doing What You’re Supposed to Do Perhaps the most significant praise for an organization comes from its peers. Debra Wong Yang, a partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, a former judge and United States Attorney, who worked with Katzman and Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
19
© christopher TODD studios
Bienert at the U.S. Attorney’s Office, stated that a boutique firm with someone of Katzman’s bankruptcy background is rare. “They’re a small powerhouse firm that packs a lot of punch and swims way above their size level.” That powerhouse punch comes in large part from the commitment of the partners to the law, the system, their clients and employees, and, ultimately, to their community. Bienert says, “What keeps me going is my belief in our system. I know that my colleagues at my law firm and I work hard on our cases in a way that gives clients the best chance to have the system work properly and fairly to them in their case. Fortunately, I believe our system works fairly and properly in the vast majority of situations. And the fact that there are times when it doesn’t always work fairly is more reason to work harder for our clients, to lessen the chance that it won’t work properly for them.” Katzman adds, “I know that I’m working with people of
20
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
high integrity who aggressively represent our clients without compromising their ethics in doing so. We’re zealous advocates and sometimes that means taking controversial positions. I’m proud of the fact that we’re willing to step up and do that when appropriate because that’s what lawyers are supposed to do.” n Contact Bienert | Katzman PC 903 Calle Amanecer, Suite 350 San Clemente, CA 92673 949-369-3700 Los Angeles Office CalEdison Building 601 W. 5th Street, Suite 720 Los Angeles, CA 90071 213-528-3400 www.bienertkatzman.com
L AW Y E RS H E L P I N G OT H E RS
CYNTHIA MORGAN-REED PART OF SOMETHING BIGGER
Cynthia Morgan-Reed volunteers on the Board of Directors for Voice of San Diego, the nation’s first online, nonprofit news outlet serving a local community. Launched in 2005, Voice of San Diego produces award-winning investigative journalism on political, economic, social, and environmental issues affecting San Diego County. It increases civic participation by providing the knowledge and analysis necessary to advocate for good government and social progress. Cynthia helps Voice of San Diego navigate strategic and legal issues. “I can’t take any credit for Voice’s outstanding reporting. But, it is enthralling to be a small part of an entity that is informing our community, making positive change, and supporting journalism. In 2019, Voice’s reporting led to four legislative bills being introduced.” Visit voiceofsandiego.org to learn more, become a supporting member, and donate. In 2018, Cynthia founded Vanst Law, a virtual law firm. Now six partners strong and growing, the firm handles business, corporate, land use, real estate, healthcare and life sciences, tax, and litigation matters. Cynthia Morgan-Reed is not affiliated with the Vosseller Law Firm.
After each case, we donate a portion of attorney’s fees to a nonprofit chosen by the client.
P L A I N T I F F P E R S O N A L I N J U RY
858-429-4062 www.vosslawyer.com
VOSSELLER LAW FIRM
Create and Implement Videos into Your Marketing Strategy by Amy Williams
T
he popularity of videos has increased significantly over the years with the desire of the consumer to get quick, visual and engaging content. Not only do videos help to develop more leads, but they can improve SEO and search rankings; increase engagement with target audiences; build trust by giving potential clients the opportunity to see you speak and share your thought leadership; provide a higher likelihood of ranking on the first page of Google; and encourage social shares. In a nutshell, videos make your expertise more accessible. There are several types of videos used in marketing: • Explainer Videos help an audience to understand difficult concepts, unique industry terminology and unique product features. The ideal length is 1 to 3 minutes. • Demonstration Videos show the benefits of your services. The ideal length is 1 to 3 minutes. • Personalized Videos increase engagement to specific audiences. The ideal length is 30 to 60 seconds. • Customer Testimonials help build trust. The ideal length is 30 seconds or less.
How Do I Put Together a Successful Video Campaign? A successful video campaign begins with a story that engages and connects an organization to its audience. While you don’t have to spend a lot of money on a video, you should make sure your videos looks professional. Video production companies are adept at working within a variety of budgets, and can help simplify the production process. Videos should emphasize the why of an organization, not just the what. An easy way to answer the why question is to ask clients why they work with you and what they feel are your unique differentiators. Many organizations don’t give enough thought into what their audience would like to hear. Instead they create messaging that they think their audience needs to hear. A video creates a first impression, so make sure to identify the unique value that your organization offers and tailor that message into what your target audience wants to hear about you. In July, Littler Mendelson launched “Littler 2 The Point,” a terrific targeted campaign of 90- to 120-second videos on general topics that started as training materials and took off as 22
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
ideal content for social media. These targeted explainer videos offer a plethora of information such as workplace harassment and FMLA leave. These videos helped the firm bring a larger audience to its website where users can explore the firm’s various offerings.
How Can I Reuse My Videos? Once you have posted your new videos to your website’s practice groups, bio pages, and landing pages, there are many more uses for videos. For example, use in social media campaigns. Facebook and LinkedIn both support video (Be sure to use an effective thumbnail with a call to action). Post on YouTube and Vimeo using tags and keywords with a detailed description or run as a video header on your Facebook page. Include in client pitches, recruiting campaigns or at trade show events. Play on a screen in your reception area. Place in email signatures, include in eNewsletters and add to directory profiles. Remember, you can also convert your video to written content. Transcribe your video and create a blog or article that you can also post to your website and social media platforms.
Do I Need to Have Video on My Website? Custom Legal Marketing conducted a survey and found that short one- to two-minute explanation videos received more watchers than high-end commercial videos. They also found that an explanation video play rate on a practice group page is higher than on the homepage because people are more likely to watch a video relating to their needs. Since many people watch videos without sound, make a video version with a text outline of your key points. In today’s professional services marketplace, video can be more compelling than text and more engaging than standard marketing brochures. Video is the secret to getting your content marketing noticed and amplifies the knowledge that you want to share with potential clients and recruits. n Amy Williams collaborates with Furia Rubel clients to develop, execute and manage highly effective marketing strategies, integrated communications campaigns, and content marketing plans to meet their business goals and objectives through a variety of marketing tactics. She brings more than 15 years of B2B marketing experience to the agency with a decade of experience in Am Law 100 law firm marketing with firms such as Schulte Roth & Zabel and Kaye Scholer, as well as in smaller boutique law firms in marketing operations and business development.
California Case Summaries New California Civil Cases by Monty A. McIntyre, Esq. These recent cases summarized by Monty A. McIntyre are from his publication California Case Summaries™. Monty prepares short summaries, organized by legal topic, of every new published California civil and family law case that California lawyers can subscribe to on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis. For more information go to https://californiacasesummaries.mykajabi.com. A California civil trial lawyer since 1980 and a member of ABOTA since 1995, Monty serves as a mediator, arbitrator and referee with ADR Services, Inc. handling cases in the areas of business, elder abuse, employment/wage & hour, insurance bad faith, legal malpractice, medical malpractice, personal injury, real property and wrongful death. To schedule a matter, contact Monty’s case manager Christopher Schuster at ADR Services, Inc. at (619) 233-1323 or christopher@adrservices.com.
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT
CALIFORNIA COURTS OF APPEAL
Elections
Arbitration
Patterson v. Padilla (2019) _ Cal.5th _ , 2019 WL 6207611: The California Supreme Court exercised its original jurisdiction and granted an emergency petition for a writ of mandate to forbid respondent from enforcing the recently enacted Presidential Tax Transparency and Accountability Act (the Act; Elections Code, section 6880 et seq.).1 Elections Code sections 6883 and 6884 purport to make the appearance of a “recognized” candidate for president on a primary ballot contingent on whether the candidate has made the disclosures specified by the Act. The California Supreme Court ruled that this additional requirement, however, is in conflict with the California Constitution’s specification of an inclusive open presidential primary ballot in article II, section 5, subdivision (c) of the California Constitution. (November 21, 2019.)
Prima Donna Development Corp. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 5956672: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s orders compelling arbitration and confirming the arbitration award as a judgment. The arbitration award found for defendant, ruling that defendant was not liable for wire transfers of $638,400 of plaintiff’s funds that was made following the agreed wire fund procedures.3 The Court of Appeal ruled that plaintiff forfeited its arguments about procedural unconscionability by not raising them at the initial court hearing. The Court of Appeal rejected plaintiff’s arguments that there was substantive unconscionability. Finally, the trial court properly denied plaintiff’s motion to vacate the arbitration award and granted defendant’s motion to confirm the award. (C.A. 6th, November 13, 2019.)
Insurance Wishnev v. The Northwestern Mutual Life Ins. Co. (2019) _ Cal.5th _ , 2019 WL 5996921: Answering a question posed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the California Supreme Court ruled that the provision in Civil Code section 1916–2, prohibiting lenders from assessing compound interest unless an agreement to that effect is clearly expressed in writing and signed by the party to be charged therewith, does not apply to lenders2 exempt under California Constitution, article XV. (November 14, 2019.)
24
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
Attorney Fees Highland Springs Conference etc. v. City of Banning (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 6208344: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s 2017 orders awarding two plaintiffs $80,000 each in attorney fees (instead of the fees of $446,710 and $216,545 requested by plaintiffs) after they successfully amended a judgment to add a new judgment debtor under an alter ego theory. The Court of Appeal ruled that the fees plaintiffs incurred in pursuing
their alter ego motion were prejudgment fees incurred in obtaining the February 8, 2017, judgment; so the fee motions were governed by Rules of Court, Rule 3.1702(b), not Rule 3.1702(c)(1) or the Enforcement of Judgments Law (the EJL; Code of Civil Procedure, section 680.010 et seq.). The Court of Appeal remanded the matter for the trial court to redetermine the amounts of fees to award each plaintiff under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, based on all of the fees each plaintiff incurred in pursuing the alter ego motion, without applying the EJL’s two-year time limitation. (C.A. 4th, November 21, 2019.)
Attorneys Sprengel v. Zbylut (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 4927194: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment against plaintiff’s complaint alleging legal malpractice in representing a limited liability company that plaintiff owned a 50% interest in. Plaintiff lacked standing because her claims were derivative not direct. Shareholders do not have a direct ownership interest in company assets, so the use of company funds to pay legal fees could not cause plaintiff a direct injury. Moreover, the representation of the limited liability company did not create an attorney-client relationship with plaintiff. (C.A. 2nd, filed September 10, 2019, published October 7, 2019.)
Civil Procedure Litinsky v. Kaplan (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 4894225: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order granting an anti-SLAPP motion to plaintiff’s complaint alleging malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff was a defendant in an earlier action brought by defendant on behalf of her client. After the dismissal of that case, plaintiff filed this action. Because the claims in this action arose from the earlier lawsuit, they arose from protected activity. Plaintiff failed to show a probability of prevailing on her claims. The claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress was precluded by the litigation privilege (Civil Code, section 47). The claim for malicious prosecution could not succeed because defendant had probable cause, based upon the statements of her client, to prosecute the earlier lawsuit against plaintiff. While the evidence from defendant’s client was contradicted by testimony from the opposing party and some third parties, it was not indisputably false. Faced with the choice of accepting the version of events presented by her client or the version described by the opposing party, defendant appropriately opted to continue advocating for her client. (C.A. 2nd, October 4, 2019.) Southwestern Law School v. Benson (2019) _ Cal.App.5th Supp. _ , 2019 WL 6033847: The Appellate Department
of the Los Angeles Superior Court reversed the trial court’s order denying defendant’s motion to dismiss under Code of Civil Procedure section 399(a) and the later judgment entered against defendant. Plaintiff sued defendant for failure to pay her student loans. The trial court granted defendant’s motion to transfer the case from Los Angeles to Ventura County. Although served with a minute order indicating the motion was granted, plaintiff did not pay the costs and fees within 30 days. The Court of Appeal ruled that the mailing of a minute order to the parties stating a transfer motion was granted was sufficient to provide service of notice subjecting the action to dismissal under section 399(a) due to nonpayment of costs and fees within 30 days. The trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss. (Appellate Department of the Los Angeles Superior Court, November 14, 2019.)
Evidence Berroteran v. Superior Court (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 5558830: The Court of Appeal granted a petition for writ of mandate directing the trial court to enter a new order denying real party in interest Ford Motor Company’s motion in limine excluding the videotaped deposition testimony of nine of Ford’s employees and former employees, and also directing the trial court to reconsider the admissibility of documentary evidence that the trial court may have excluded because it found the depositions inadmissible. Plaintiff’s first amended complaint alleged causes of action for multiple counts of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civil Code, section 1750 et seq.), and violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (id., section 1790 et seq.). The Court of Appeal disagreed with Wahlgren v. Coleco Industries, Inc. (1984) 151 Cal. App.3d 543 to the extent it espoused a blanket proposition that a party has a different motive in examining a witness at a deposition than at trial. The Court of Appeal ruled that the testimony of the nine witnesses was admissible because, in the earlier actions, Ford had the right and opportunity to cross-examine its employees and former employees with a similar motive and interest as it would have in the instant case. Each case, including the present one, concerns Ford’s model 6.0-liter diesel engine, the engine’s alleged deficiencies, Ford’s alleged knowledge of those deficiencies, and Ford’s strategy regarding repairing the engines. While a party’s motive and interest to cross-examine may potentially differ when the prior questioning occurs in a pre-trial deposition, Ford failed to demonstrate any such different motive or interest here. (C.A. 2nd, October 29, 2019.)
Insurance Miller Marital Deduction Trust v. Zurich American Ins. Co. (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 5304862: The Court
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
25
of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order denying an antiSLAPP motion to strike (Code of Civil Procedure, section 425.16) a state court complaint alleging breach of contract and bad faith as a result of defendant’s refusal to appoint Cumis counsel to defend additionally named insureds in a counterclaim filed in a separate federal action regarding environmental contamination that originated from a dry cleaning business. The Court of Appeal disagreed with the trial court’s finding that the action arose out of protected activity. Not all attorney conduct in connection with litigation is protected by section 425.16. What gave rise to liability was not the fact of counsels’ communications, but that defendant allegedly denied plaintiffs the benefit of panel counsel’s independent professional judgment in rendering legal services to them. The Court of Appeal ruled that the anti-SLAPP statute did not apply to the cause of action for breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. (C.A. 1st, October 21, 2019.) 1
Torts Dobbs v. City of Los Angeles (2019) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2019 WL 5206043: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a case where plaintiff alleged she was injured by a dangerous condition after she walked into a round concrete pillar (a bollard) that was 17.5 inches wide and 17.5 inches tall and used to protect the Los Angeles Convention Center from car bombs. The trial court properly granted summary judgment on the basis of design immunity. Discretionary approval need not be established with testimony of the people who approved the project. Testimony about the entity’s discretionary approval custom and practice can be proper even though the witness was not personally involved in the approval process. The trial court properly found the exercise of approval authority was reasonable. (C.A. 2nd, October 16, 2019.) n
This act was intended to prevent President Trump’s name from appearing on the primary ballot if he did not release his income tax returns.
Defendant was an exempt insurance company who issued permanent life insurance (whole life or universal life) policies to plaintiff, and charged plaintiff compound interest on loans taken against the policies . 2
Apparently, the company CEO’s email account was hacked when he was overseas. Emails were sent from the hacked account to another company employee requesting that this employee have defendant make the wire transfers. The employee did so believing the emails came from the CEO. 3
Monty A. McIntyre, Esq. Mediator, Arbitrator & Referee ADR Services, Inc.
To schedule, contact Christopher Schuster: (619) 231-1323 or christopher@adrservices.com
Organized, succinct summaries of EVERY new published California civil and family law case, published every month for $24.99 a month. Subscribe at californiacasesummaries.mykajabi.com
26
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
PERSONAL INJURY AND CRIMINAL DEFENSE LITIGATORS
AGGRESSIVE AND EXPERIENCED LITIGATORS THAT GET RESULTS Top Client Reviews Average 5-Stars on:
San Diego Office 945 4th Avenue, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 92101
Los Angeles Office 355 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 2450 Los Angeles, CA 90071
1-888-50-LAWFIRM www.HHJtrialattorneys.com
5 Reasons Why Hiring a Sales Professional Will Benefit Your Firm by Jim Cranston
T
he CFO called me and asked if we could schedule our initial meeting to discuss the project. I was surprised that he had called me and not the partner I brought to the pitch meeting. Then it occurred to me. The CFO thought I was the lead partner on the engagement! I spent ten years in sales at Big 4 firms. After my first few years in legal, I had expected the trend to hire sales professionals in law firms would take off. It didn’t. But many years later, we see a quickly growing trend to make these hires. Today, a new era in the industry includes professional sales executives driving new business with both existing and prospective clients. Based on my own Big 4 experience, here are five reasons why hiring sales executives makes sense for your firm:
1 Sales professionals have more time to sell than your lawyers. My partners would bill between 1,400 – 1,600 hours a year. While they were doing billable work, I was selling. That’s a lot more time dedicated to bringing in business.
2 Sales professionals leverage partner time. I’d put in countless hours of phone calls, research and even initial meetings before bringing one of my partners into an opportunity. That equated to a tremendous amount of time that the partners didn’t have to invest on the front end of the sales process. A good sales executive can find and pre-qualify opportunities.
3 Salespeople will open doors. When I closed big deals, my partners were always amazed that I was able to get past the “gatekeepers,” get meetings, and eventually get business (because they had tried for years often without success). Salespeople know how to sell, period. 28
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
4 Sales executives are persistent. For years I’ve heard from my coaching clients that “the guy never called me back.” So that’s it? Often after one attempt, or losing one opportunity, many lawyers will move on. A salesperson would not only try several times, but also figure out another way to get in. If you’re interested in gold, Fort Knox has many doors.
5 Sales folks are agnostic as to what they want to sell. Let me explain. Most practicing attorneys are most interested in, and most comfortable with, selling their own services. Corporate lawyers will focus on selling corporate work and so on. I don’t blame them … it’s what they know best. But a salesperson will first assess the client’s needs before determining who to introduce to the prospect. Therefore, the firm may have many opportunities for expanded services to one client. Building a sales team at your law firm will have many rewards. While the lawyers will be very involved in closing the business, teaming up with sales professionals on the front end of the sales process will save a significant amount of lawyer time. Thus, ultimately freeing up your lawyers to do what they do best … practice law and serve clients. n Jim Cranston is a founding Principal of LawVision and is widely recognized as a leading authority on sales and business development in the legal industry. He has developed a unique method for teaching sales skills to lawyers and law firms, which consistently helps professionals win new clients and grow firm revenues through his innovative programs. Previously he served as a Managing Director with Hildebrandt Baker Robbins, one of the world’s leading law firm consultancy organizations.
Representing Fortune 500 Companies, Small Businesses and Individuals
Partners and Co-Founders, Robert Parks and Keith Solar
Focused on Achieving the Best Practical Solutions and Service for Our Clients Leading Civil and Commercial Litigation Attorneys Concerning:
Now Accepting Referrals
• Consumer Law including Class Action Defense • Business Litigation/ Entire Product Supply Chain • United States Tuna Industry • Water Law including Desalination Industry • Proposition 65 Compliance and Defense • Bankruptcy and Debtor/Creditor • Real Estate Transactions and Litigation • Family Law
501 West Broadway Suite 1540 San Diego, CA 92101 619-501-2700 www.ParksAndSolar.com
Peterson Reporting. Providing nationwide service since 1986.
From day one of your
Reporting
deposition to the last day
Videography
of your trial, Peterson Reporting
Trial Presentation
is an indispensable member of your trial team. Proven professionalism and proficiency
Free Conference Rooms
Let us “do the time” to get your project right!
Live Streaming Services Video Conferencing Services
for more than 25 years. Locally owned, globally known.
We Know Marketing Like You Know The Law
• Writing for the layperson
Global Reach
• Putting together a presentation
Complex Cases
• Developing a marketing strategy
Accurate, Fast
• Sprucing up your website • Designing an ad, booklet, flyer or brochure • Establishing a better logo, mission statement or tagline
530 B Street, Suite 350 San Diego, CA 92101
619 260 1069
Since 1986 petersonreporting.com Call to request green delivery of your transcripts and receive a discount. 30
215-550-1435 • penn-creative.com
Attorney Journals San Diego | Volume 197, 2020
Peterson AttJrnl HPV.indd 1
7/12/13 5:04 PM
PRSRT STD US POSTAGE
PAID
Santa Ana, CA PERMIT NO. 777
UNRIVALED JURY VERDICTS SETTLEMEN T S PERSONAL SERVICE REFERRAL FEES
PANISH SHEA & BOYLE is happy to discuss how
we may assist you in your case. Please contact
the Honorable Judge Peter Polos (Ret.) for more information at polos@psblaw.com.
WWW.PSBLAW.COM
310.477.1700
1.877.800.1700