 |
|
Baker, Keener & Nahra, LLP's most significant cases include:
Teresa Escamilla v. Brady Flynn, Scanply International Wood Products, Inc.Case No. 02CC03574
The firm represented plaintiff, Teresa Escamilla. The plaintiff was crossing Pacific Coast Highway on Avocado Avenue in the City of Newport Beach. While she was in the crosswalk on a green light, the defendant struck her with his vehicle. At the time of the accident, the defendant was delivering wood material to a trade show on behalf of the defendant Scanply International Wood Products, Inc. As a result of the collision, the plaintiff sustained a fractured left femur, multiple rib fractures, a lacerated spleen and a collapsed lung. Post-accident, she also suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. The jury awarded the plaintiff $1,725,339.
Realty Adventures, Inc., dba Lee & Associates v. Janes House Square, Ltd.
The firm represented defendant, Janes House Square Ltd. Broker sued its client for commissions alleged to be owed on the attempted sale of a commercial building in Hollywood, California. Broker contended he brought a ready and willing buyer to his client for a sale in the amount of $1.75 million. He claims he is owed 6% of the sale price despite the fact the sale was never consummated. Plaintiff claimed the failure to accept the buyer's offer was unreasonable and in bad faith. Defendant seller claimed he was entitled to stop the transaction since the parties did not agree to terms of timing.
Judge Ray Hart found in favor of defendant and awarded attorney fees per contract.
In Re: HSQ Litigation (Arbitration No. 72Y104...)
The firm represented a law firm in a legal malpractice claim. Plaintiffs asserted in a binding Arbitration that the defendant law firm had failed to properly represent them in association with an underlying sale of a business to a NASDAQ listed publicly-traded systems company. Plaintiffs alleged the defendant law firm had failed to provide due diligence on the purchasing entity, nor obtained appropriate indemnity coverage as a result of the transaction. Plaintiffs claimed damages in excess of $18 million. After a three-week Arbitration, judgment was entered in favor of the defendant.
PPA v. BCC (Arbitration No. 72Y180...)
The firm represented the minority shareholders in relation to the operations and purchase of stock options. The majority shareholders claimed damages in excess of $20 million. After a one-month Arbitration, the Arbitration Panel awarded nothing to the majority shareholders and awarded $125,000.00 in attorneys' fees to the minority shareholders.
Hudson v. Keller Industries
The firm represented a ladder manufacturer in a personal injury claim. The action was moved to Federal Court. After a one-week trial, the jury found that there was no defect in the subject product and awarded costs to the defendant.
O'Hill v. Adams (Case: SC064894)
The firm represented the seller of a property located in Beverly Hills, California. Plaintiff claimed that seller had breached its contract to sell the plot of land. The co-defendant, the subsequent buyer, settled on the eve of trial. After a two-week trial, the jury found in favor of the seller and awarded attorneys' fees and costs of $524,000.00.
In Re: Landmark
The firm represented a law firm accused of malpractice in relation to their representation of a collection agency. The collection agency claimed damages in the amount of $1,200,000. After a ten-day Arbitration, the arbitrator found in favor of the defendant law firm and awarded attorneys' fees and costs in the amount of $60,000.00
Case No. YC035878 - Professional Malpractice
The firm represented the defendant, a general surgeon. A mother of two adult children was hospitalized with suspected colitis. A decision was made to insert a catheter in the neck area to allow for intravenous nutrition while treating the colitis. Defendant attempted to insert the catheter but was unsuccessful. The attempt punctured the lung. She was eventually required to have a chest tube, developed an infectious process and died in the hospital. The family claimed that the surgeon did not obtain informed consent and negligently inserted the catheter needle, all of which led to the infection and death. The defense introduced evidence that the decedent was aware of the risks and that the technique of placement was appropriate and reasonable, even though a complication did occur.
The jury found in favor of the defendant.
Case No. EC034343 - Professional Malpractice
The firm represented the defendant, a urologist. A 61 year old man underwent radical prostatectomy by the defendant urologist. The patient died suddenly two weeks after the discharge from a massive pulmonary embolism. On autopsy, the patient was found to have a certain amount of cardiac artery disease and was found to have suffered a heart attack some time around the time of the surgery and possibly another one in the distant past. The plaintiff claimed that the patient should have been worked up with specialists in heart and lung disease before being cleared for surgery and that, if that had happened, treatment would have been tailored to avoid the risk of cardiac complications or blood clots. They also claimed that there was a lack of informed consent regarding the risks of the surgery. The plaintiff is the surviving spouse. She claimed a loss of future financial support and household services of approximately $350,000, along with general damages.
The jury found in favor of the defendant.
|
