EXAMPLES OF CASES HANDLED BY BULEY LAW APC TRIED TO VERDICT OR JUDGMENT
NEVO-HACOHEN ET AL V. HOROWITZ ET AL ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE # 30-2017-00947246
Judgment for Plaintiffs December 27, 2018 – Jury Trial
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff, homeowners, who sued Defendants, specialty home builders, for damaging Plaintiffs’ 114 foot retaining wall during Defendants’ construction of a 5,000 square foot new home in Corona Del Mar. Mr. Buley was retained 6 weeks before scheduled trial to present the case to a jury. The Defendants’ asserted there was no damage to the wall and that the condition of the wall posed no risk to Plaintiffs’ home or the foundation of Defendants’ newly constructed home. The Defendants home was built on a hill above the Plaintiffs home and the retaining wall maintained the support for the Defendants home, and protected the Plaintiffs home against a potential landslide onto Plaintiffs property. The trial took place over 3 weeks and involved testimony of numerous building contractors and engineering experts. The jury determined that the Defendants’ were in fact negligent and had trespassed onto Plaintiffs property. Judgment was had in favor of Plaintiffs and consisted of a monetary award of $175,000, plus injunctive relief whereby Defendants’ have been ordered to engage in substantial remediation work to correct/repair the dangerous condition which they have caused during their construction. Post trial motions for recovery of legal fees and costs are pending.
STEVE HOWARD ET AL V. TAMARA BAILEY AND BAILEY AND ASSOCIATES MANUFACTURERS REPS INC ET AL AND RELATED CROSS ACTIONS ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE # 30-2009-00315225 CONSOLIDATED WITH 30-2009-00315229 AND RELATED TO 30-2011-00473977
Judgment for Plaintiff and Cross-Defendants November 2, 2016-4 week Bench Trial
Mr. Buley represented Steve Howard, his wife and family members and his business F&L Industries who sued and were sued by Tamara Bailey and Bailey and Associates Manufacturers Reps, Inc. (“BAMRI”). Mr. Howard and Ms. Bailey were 50% owners of BAMRI and each accused the other of breaches of fiduciary duty and other claims. Ms. Bailey asserted that Mr. Howard had improperly diverted BAMRI business to his own company, F&L Industries, and she claimed damages owed in excess of $17 million. Mr. Howard sought dissolution of BAMRI and an accounting to determine how much money he was owed for money generated by BAMRI after he was locked out of the business during the litigation. The case had proceeded for several years before Mr. Buley was substituted in to take over the litigation and bring the matter to trial. After a 4 week bench trial, Judgment was entered in favor of Mr. Howard. A dissolution of the company was ordered, Ms. Bailey was ordered to return a minimum of $500,000 to Mr. Howard plus any additional sums found to be owing after the completion of a court ordered accounting.
FRED CONTRERAS ET AL V. JOHN GHIOTTO ET AL LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT CASE # KC066358
Judgment for Defendants May 31, 2017-3 Week Jury Trial
Mr. Buley represented Defendants, 8 adult children of decedent Lydia Contreras against a claim of elder abuse filed by their stepfather, Plaintiff. Plaintiff asserted the children had physically, emotionally, and financially abused their mother and coerced her to transfer certain of her separate assets to them through an estate plan that she created during the last 18 months of her life while she was being cared for by her children. The Plaintiff sought $7 million in damages against the children. After 3 weeks of jury trial, Judgment was entered in favor of Defendants and nothing was awarded to Plaintiff.
DECTON INC V. APPA SEAFOOD ET AL ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE #30-2014-00750022
Judgment for Plaintiff March 20, 2017-2 Day Bench Trial
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff, Decton Inc, a staffing company that supplies workers on a contract basis to other companies. Defendants included Appa Seafood and its principals who had contracted with Decton for labor and then refused to pay. The outstanding balance at time of default on the contract was $493,000. Judgment was entered in favor of Decton and against Appa and its owner Thomas Rindt personally in the amount of $714,000 which included interest and attorney fees and costs.
BLUE WATER SUNSET, LLC. V. FIRST VIEW, LLC, ET AL. LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT CASE # BC 316696
Judgment for Defendant Philip Markowitz November 2014 –Bench Trial
Mr. Buley represented Defendant Philip Markowitz in this partnership dispute case. Mr. Markowitz was listed on LLC formation documents of three separate LLCs as a member with Plaintiff Blue Water Sunset, LLC. Markowitz provided all the capital that the LLCs used to acquire approximately $6 million worth of real estate. The real estate was income generating real estate in Los Angeles County. Plaintiff asserted a 50% ownership interest in all the assets and engaged Markowitz in a 10-year long litigation battle seeking to dissolve the LLCs and take possession of 50% of the real estate. After suffering a series of setbacks with other attorneys representing him, Markowitz retained Mr. Buley to take over the case in 2012. Markowitz offered the Plaintiff $500,000 to settle the matter just prior to trial and the Plaintiff rejected the offer and the matter went to trial. Mr. Buley tried the case and obtained a directed verdict and Judgment in favor of Markowitz and against Plaintiff. The Plaintiff to take nothing. Plaintiff was represented at trial by Yana Henriks and Randy McMurray. Mr. McMurray was previously the managing partner in The Cochoran Firm and has been recognized by his peers as one of LA County’s top trial attorneys.
BRUCE AL—— V. MARK B——, ET AL. ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE #: 06CC12—
Verdict for Plaintiff November 2008-Jury Trial
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff against Defendants in an unfair business practices case involving the alleged theft of Plaintiff’s business. Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant was his payroll management company and that when Plaintiff was diagnosed with cancer and allegedly unable to manage his construction company that Defendant locked Plaintiff out of his company and took over control of the company without compensating Plaintiff for his business. Plaintiff passed away shortly after the lawsuit was filed and Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff’s wife and family through trial. The jury entered a verdict finding Defendants had engaged in a conspiracy to convert Plaintiff’s business and assets for their own use and the matter resulted in a confidential settlement before the punitive damages phase of the trial was presented to the Jury. The attorney for Defendants was Steven R. Young “The Gunslinger” a well-known and accomplished Orange County trial attorney recognized by his peers as one of Orange County’s top trial attorneys.
SUE TR—— V. SUS—- TRIK–, ET AL. ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE #: 30-2009-0031—–
Judgment for Plaintiff September 2010-Bench Trial
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff in a dispute over ownership of real estate and misappropriated funds. Plaintiff filed divorce papers upon her husband who shortly thereafter transferred over $750,000 from a joint bank account oversees to his brother and he asserted that their home and two other pieces of real estate they had acquired during their 20 year marriage, which had been titled in the name of his brother, all belonged to his brother. After taking this position, and creating documents to support this position, Plaintiff’s husband took his life. Mr. Buley sued Plaintiff’s brother-in-law and other in-laws under theories of equitable title, fraud, conspiracy and conversion. Plaintiff proposed a settlement in which Defendant would transfer title in Plaintiff’s home to Plaintiff and Defendants would retain ownership of the other two properties and the $750,000. Defendants rejected the offer. The equitable title matter was bi-furcated and tried first. The Court rendered a statement of decision whereby the Court found the home belonged to Plaintiff, and the two additional properties also belonged to Plaintiff and her deceased husband, to be apportioned through probate. The $750,000 in cash was determined to be Plaintiff’s money and not repayment of long outstanding loans as had been asserted by Defendant. Before the fraud and conspiracy phase of the case commenced the Defendant agreed to deliver all the money and transfer all title to all properties to Plaintiff as well as to reimburse Plaintiff a portion of the legal fees she incurred in pursuing her claims against him.
TWO WORLDS, INC., ET AL. V. PERRY JOHNSON, ET AL. ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE #: 30-2008-00111817
Judgment for Plaintiff Two Worlds, Inc. January 2010-Jury Trial
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff Two Worlds, Inc. and its two owners in a business fraud case against Defendant Perry Johnson. Johnson sold two of his five Fat Burger hamburger franchises to his “friends”, the owners of Two Worlds. The Two Worlds owners agreed to pay Johnson $900,000 to purchase the franchises after Johnson represented the franchises were very profitable and he presented the Plaintiffs with franchise profit and loss statements confirming the franchises profitability. Johnson received $450,000 of the $900,000 agreed to purchase price when Plaintiff suspected the franchises were never profitable. Discovery obtained during the litigation uncovered that Johnson had falsified the profit and loss statements. The jury entered a verdict in favor of the Plaintiffs for all the money they had paid Johnson as well as legal fees and interest. The second phase of the case seeking punitive damages was to begin two days later and when the attorneys and the jury convened to commence that phase Johnson’s attorney informed the Court that Johnson had filed a bankruptcy the night before and the trial was now suspended. Mr. Buley requested and received a 48 hour stay of the trial proceedings and sought and obtained from the Federal Bankruptcy Court an emergency order lifting the Bankruptcy stay so that the State court trial could proceed to conclusion. The jury awarded punitive damages, Johnson withdrew his bankruptcy petition and he then appealed the Judgment. Mr. Buley handled the appeal which resulted in affirmance of the Judgment by the Appellate Court.
RITA WILLIAM, ET AL. V. GEORGE WILLIAMS, ET AL. ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE #: 03CC13420
Judgment for Cross-Complainant Alice Johnson December 2007-Bench Trial
Mr. Buley represented Cross Complainant Alice Johnson in a civil conspiracy fraud case where Johnson alleged her ex-husband, Thurman, and his business partner, George Williams, conspired to conceal assets and defraud her out of over $4 million. Johnson alleged that Thurman had been in the auto sales business with George Williams for a number of years and that Thurman was a 50% owner of several auto dealerships and other LLC assets that had been acquired over the life of their business relationship. Johnson further asserted that George Williams regularly lied under oath by asserting that Thurman had no interest in any of the LLCs or the LLC assets. At trial Mr. Buley established, through the tracing of numerous bank account statements and check ledgers, that the two gentlemen were operating a secret partnership and that Thurman was receiving a monthly cash payment equivalent to 50% of the net profits of the LLCs going back as far as 10 years. The Court entered Judgment in favor of Johnson and against Thurman and George Williams for William’s roll in assisting Thurman in his plan to defraud Johnson. The LLCs were in possession of a 30 year land lease which was subleased to a new auto dealership paying rent to the LLCs for the next 30 years. With the Judgment Mr. Buley obtained an Assignment of Rents Order from the Court requiring the tenant to deliver rent payments to Johnson for the remainder of the lease term, 30 years.
FORTUNE, ET AL. V. JOHN HOOVER, ET. AL. MOJAVE VALLEY ARIZONA SUPERIOR COURT CASE #: CV 2008-821
Award for Plaintiff but in an Amount Which Was About 10% of the Claimed Damages-2010 Binding Arbitration
Mr. Buley was admitted pro hac vice to represent Defendant Hoover in Arizona in an investment dispute between Hoover, a real estate developer, and one of his major investors. The Plaintiff sought over $4.2 million in damages and additional amounts in punitive damages alleging that Hoover had engaged in intentional misconduct. The Arbitrator determined that Hoover did not engage in any intentional improper acts and that at best had been negligent in the bookkeeping and operation of several of his LLCs in which the Plaintiff had invested. Plaintiff was awarded only about 10% of the amounts he had been seeking.
PARTIAL LIST OF ADDITIONAL CASES TRIED TO JUDGMENT OR VERDICT:
MIKE POHJOLA V. CAMCO PACIFIC CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., ET AL. • LASC CASE #: BC262319
Breach of Construction Contract (Arbitration Award for Buley Client Plaintiff)
RACHELLE L. CHANG, ET AL. V. DOLLAR RENT-A-CAR SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL. • OCSC CASE #: 81 63 23
Wrongful Death (Jury Verdict for Buley Client Plaintiff)
GEORGE BOGGIO, ET AL. V. SHOUSHAR SUSIE ESSAYAN, ET AL. • OCSC CASE #: 738505
Breach of Contract (Bench Trial Judgment for Buley Client Plaintiff)
YESENIA CARRILLO, ET AL. V. WILLIAM WALTON STEWART, ET AL. • RCSC CASE #: RIC515129
Breach of Contract (Bench Trial Judgment for Buley Client Defendant)
STACY WONG, ET AL. V. BRIAN WING, ET AL. • LASC CASE #: BC458177
Declaratory Relief (Bench Trial Judgment for Buley Client Plaintiff)
BELLE FLEUR V. NEWPORT COAST DEVELOPERS • OCSC CASE#: 02CC00177
Construction Defect (Jury Trial Verdict for Buley Client Plaintiff)
EXAMPLES OF CASES HANDLED BY BULEY LAW APC SETTLED PRIOR TO TRIAL
FISHMAN ET AL V. SAVAGE E-LIQUID ET AL ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE #30-2016-00883440
Mr. Buley represented Defendants who had been sued by Plaintiffs who asserted Plaintiffs’ owned an interest in Defendants companies. Defendants’ alleged they had borrowed money from Plaintiffs during the start-up phase of their e-cigarette related businesses. Defendants’ businesses have grown substantially and the Plaintiffs’ asserted that the “start-up loan” was, in fact, a capital contribution that was made in exchange for a 40% ownership interest in the entities which Defendants had thereafter started, and developed. Defendants’ replaced their original attorney with Mr. Buley about 16 months after the lawsuit had been filed. Mr. Buley amended the Defendants pleadings and focused the case on issues related to the uneforceability of the alleged purchase agreement asserted by Plaintiffs. With the issues between the parties framed differently the parties then went to a voluntary mediation and worked out settlement that resulted in a payment being made to Plaintiffs in exchange for Plaintiffs’ disavowing any interest in Defendants business activities.
SITEWORKS CONCRETE SYSTEMS, INC. V GRANITEX CONSTRUCTION ET AL ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE # 30-2015-00774151
Settled One Week before Trial –Sept 2016.
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff, Siteworks Concrete Systems, Inc against Defendant Granitex Construction and its principals. Plaintiff claimed that it had entered into a business partnership with Defendant and that Defendant unilaterally terminated the partnership and retained the benefits of the venture without properly compensating Plaintiff for its share of the profits made during the period the partnership existed. Plaintiff demanded $300,000 prior to filing any lawsuit. After the lawsuit was filed and on the eve of trial Defendant agreed to settle the matter for $335,000.
CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT IN RECENT FEDERAL CASE-
SETTLED 2014 • US DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT CALIFORNIA
Mr. Buley was lead trial counsel representing fourteen Plaintiffs against a multi-billion dollar corporate defendant alleging breach of contract and misclassification of the Plaintiffs as independent contractors when in fact Plaintiffs asserted they were actually treated as employees. The corporate defendant had been sued in at least four other jurisdictions under similar theories and had succeeded in having the cases dismissed at the early pleading stages in each of those cases. Mr. Buley succeeded in defeating the Defendant’s several motions seeking to dismiss the action and then when it was apparent the matter would go to trial the Defendant entered into a settlement agreement favorable to Mr. Buley’s clients. The settlement is confidential pursuant to the agreement of the parties.
JANICE L. —- V. M. —– ET AL. • OCSC CASE #. 30-2011-005—-
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff in a construction defect case wherein Defendant Contractor was paid over $300,000 to construct an addition to Plaintiff’s Newport Coast Home and Plaintiff asserted the construction was substandard and created health and safety issues for its occupants. The case resulted in a confidential settlement.
JOSEPH R. BULEY, SR. V. I.D. TECHNOLOGY CORP, INC., ET AL. • OCSC CASE #: 30-2011-00515487
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff in an auto accident personal injury case and obtained a settlement in favor of Plaintiff on the eve of trial in an amount equal to the original settlement demand made by Plaintiff at the outset of the trial, $75,000.
ETM TRUST V. HARWOOD ET AL • OCSC CASE #: 02CC00177
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff in this construction defect matter alleging substandard construction and health and safety violations by the general contractor and subcontractors. The case settled within 80% of Plaintiff’s original demand.
MIKE POHJOLA V. CAMCO PACIFIC CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., ET AL. • OCSC CASE #. 02CC17310
Mr. Buley represented the contractor who was not being paid by the developer regarding a change order dispute. The case settled on the day trial was to start and this matter was the second between Mr. Buley’s client and the developer, the previous matter having been tried before an arbitrator with Mr. Buley again representing the Plaintiff and obtaining an award in Plaintiff’s favor.
LIST OF APPELLATE DECISIONS
CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST V. THOMAS DELPONTI ET AL • 4TH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIV 2
Published at 232 Cal. App.4th 162 (Dec. 9, 2014)
Mr. Buley represented a real estate developer Defendant at trial who was being sued by lender under a personal guarantee Defendant had provided the bank as condition of obtaining a construction loan. Defendant prevailed at trial under theory that Bank’s misconduct in relation to how it serviced the loan estopped bank from pursuing Defendant under the personal guarantee. Plaintiff appealed. Appellate Court issued a published opinion adopting the legal argument made by Mr. Buley.
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION V. ALLEN • COURT OF APPEAL 2ND DISTRICT
Published at 164 Cal. App.4th 322
Mr. Buley pursued collection of a judgment on behalf of his client and attempted to foreclose on Defendant and Judgment Debtor’s home. Defendant challenged the validity of the foreclosure proceeding at the trial court level and lost and then appealed.
Mr. Buley represented Plaintiff in the Appellate Court and the Appellate Court adopted Mr. Buley’s legal argument as part of its published opinion.
ETM TRUST V. HARWOOD ET AL. • COURT OF APPEAL/4TH DISTRICT/DIV. THREE G038146
Petition for writ of mandate filed by Mr. Buley on behalf of Plaintiff which was granted which reversed trial Court’s order that was adverse to Buley’s client.
BLUE WATER SUNSET, LLC V. PHILIP MARKOWITZ, ET AL • COURT OF APPEAL 2ND DISTRICT/DIV. TWO CASE#: B261752 JANUARY 24, 2017
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION V. ALLEN • COURT OF APPEAL 2ND DISTRICT CASE #:B218292
RADOSEVICH V. ALLEN • COURT OF APPEAL 2ND DISTRICT CASE #:B218184
RADOSEVICH V. ALLEN • COURT OF APPEAL 2ND DISTRICT CASE #:B212592
BRETT CUEVA, ET AL. V. PERRY JOHNSON, ET AL. • COURT OF APPEAL 4TH DISTRICT/DIV. THREE CASE #: G043539
TODD GORDON V. A.C. INVESTMENTS, INC. • COURT OF APPEAL 2ND DISTRICT/DIV. TWO CASE #: B186421
PURE POWER! INC. V. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE • COURT OF APPEALS 9TH CIRCUIT CASE # : 02-56014
83 Fed.Appx. 901; 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25159
MICHAEL TATOR V. ARNOLD • COURT OF APPEAL 4TH DISTRICT/DIV. THREE G031955
PESTANO V. MID-CENTURY INSURANCE, INC • COURT OF APPEAL 4TH DISTRICT/DIV. THREE G020123
CALLAHAN ET AL V. BURKE ET AL. • COURT OF APPEAL 4TH DISTRICT/DIV. THREE G02072
Examples of Cases:
BULEY LAW A.P.C.