We have experience with and engage in high-stakes court designated complex litigation, including high-profile cases – both Plaintiff and Defense – involving, among other things, CCP § 638, et. seq. judicial referees, Evid. Code § 730 forensic financial experts, qui tam relator actions, and disputes well over $100 Million dollars. Because of the confidential nature of many such cases, not all results can be disclosed.

J.D. AQUINO CORPORATION vs. PORTFOLIO ESCROW, INC., et al.

This case involved an alleged broker’s liability after a fire burned down a structure which lacked insurance. This firm caused the dismissal of the defendant with prejudice after prevailing on a host of critical motions.

ANATOLIY KANEVSKY, AS TRUSTEE OF THE KANEVSKY AND SHEVTCHENKO LIVING TRUST vs. YNI LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

An alleged note purchaser attempted to foreclose on a property not in accordance with the assignor’s modifications to the note. This firm represented the Plaintiff and assured that Plaintiff kept his property after securing a temporary restraining order and a later final settlement.

LYNELLE HENNINGER vs. REAL ESTATE ADVISORY, LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, et al.

This case involved alleged fraud claims, including a Civil RICO, against a number of defendants, in relation to land. In representing four of the several defendants, this firm demonstrated the lack of liability and secured a dismissal with prejudice by and through a nuisance settlement sum.

MIGRAN SLDRYAN vs. KB HOLDINGS & INVESTMENTS LLC, et al.

This case involved an alleged fraudulent transfer of title, purportedly as a result of forged loan documents, ultimately leading to a foreclosure. This firm secured a win through a series of critical motions and caused the dismissal, with prejudice, of multiple defendants – both entities and individuals.

Past Results Are Not a Guarantee of Future Results

Descriptions and summaries about our attorney’s prior cases and settlements found on this website are intended only to provide information about the activities and experience of our attorneys and should not be understood as a guarantee or assurance of future success in any matter. The results portrayed were dependent on a variety of facts and circumstances unique to the particular matters described, and do not reflect the entire record of the individual attorney(s) involved. Past results are not a guarantee of future results, and the outcome of your particular case or matter cannot be predicted using a lawyer’s or law firm’s past results. Every case is unique and different and should be evaluated on its own merits, without comparison to other cases that may have had different facts and circumstances.