Plaintiff sued various defendants, including numerous public agencies, alleging breach of contract. On behalf of three out-of-state public entity defendants, we successfully argued that California courts did not have personal jurisdiction over the matter and that exercising such jurisdiction would be a gross violation of defendants’ constitutional rights to due process and violate notions of fair play and substantial justice.

In this action, plaintiffs alleged that, as a result of exposure to numerous defendants’ paint products, decedent developed and died of acute myelogenous leukemia. Plaintiffs produced voluminous documents allegedly establishing that decedent purchased our client’s paint products. We filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that plaintiffs had insufficient evidence of decedent’s exposure to our client’s product and that plaintiffs could not establish that exposure to our client’s product was a substantial factor in causing his leukemia. A couple of days before plaintiffs’ opposition was due, we reached a favorable settlement on behalf of our client.

In this action, plaintiff alleged that defendant deputies and the County violated his civil rights when the deputies allegedly used excessive force in detaining him and in attempting to cover up their alleged misconduct. At trial, defendants contended that the use of force was reasonable in light of plaintiff’s actions. In addition, defendants argued that plaintiff had no evidence that defendants conspired to hide their use of force.  After deliberating, the jury returned a unanimous decision in favor of all the defendants, finding that they acted properly in detaining the plaintiff.