Call & Jensen recently obtained a complete 12-0 defense trial verdict for its clients, a prestigious Southern California private university and one of its employees, following a three-week jury trial in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County. The lawsuit involved detailed claims of sexual harassment and discrimination, pregnancy harassment and discrimination, constructive discharge in violation of public policy, failure to prevent harassment and physical disability discrimination and unpaid overtime and missed meal and rest breaks. Although the plaintiff asked the jury to award more than $3 million in damages, the firm’s attorneys proved at trial that her claims were simply not credible. Attorneys David R. Sugden, Marlynn P. Howe, and Melinda Evans obtained the vindicating victory for their clients.
Call & Jensen secured a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in superior court against a former officer of Call & Jensen’s client, precluding the officer from unlawfully competing against the client by soliciting its customers and employees. The victory was obtained at the beginning stages of the litigation and protected Call & Jensen’s client from being raided by the former officer. The team consisted of attorneys Mark L. Eisenhut, Scott R. Hatch, and Joshua G. Simon.
In July of 2017, David Sugden and Scott Hatch helped Applied General Agency, Inc. (“AGA”) obtain a jury verdict of over a million dollars. The jury found in AGA’s favor as against Greenleaf Financial and Insurance Services, Inc., Christopher Mulder, and Lucas Johnson for Misappropriation of Trade Secrets and Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Relations, as well as against Lucas Johnson for Breach of his Duty of Loyalty to AGA. The jury also found that Defendants’ misappropriation of trade secrets was willful and malicious which allows AGA to seek recovery of its attorneys’ fees. The three-week trial capped a litigation that included Call & Jensen obtaining an order for forensic inspection of the Defendants’ computers due to their discovery abuses, as well as monetary, issue, and evidentiary sanctions.
At the outset of a trademark infringement lawsuit in federal court, Call & Jensen secured a preliminary injunction on behalf of a prominent medical device manufacturer against its competitors. Arguing against a tentative denying the preliminary injunction, Call & Jensen’s attorneys convinced the federal judge to change course, affirm the validity of the manufacturer’s key mark, and find that all elements of the preliminary injunction standard had been met. The team consisted of attorneys Mark L. Eisenhut, Samuel G. Brooks, and Joshua G. Simon.
Call & Jensen successfully secured dismissal at the pleading stage of trademark infringement claims brought against a prominent national client. In the order granting dismissal of the claims, the court held that the plaintiff had failed to support a plausible claim that the defendants’ use of a name for a new cosmetics line was likely to cause consumer confusion. This victory follows on the heels of Call & Jensen’s defeat of the plaintiff’s surprise ex parte application for a temporary restraining order involving these claims. The team consisted of attorneys Scott Shaw, Julie Trotter, and Lisa Wegner.
Call & Jensen attorneys Julie Trotter, Delavan Dickson, and Shirin Forootan obtained summary adjudication on fifteen of seventeen causes of action alleged against a skilled nursing facility and one of its former Executive Directors, including on the Plaintiff’s wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims. The motion was largely premised on damaging admissions made by Plaintiff while she was being deposed by Ms. Trotter.
Call & Jensen is proud to announce that ten of its attorneys were named as “Southern California Rising Stars” by Southern California Super Lawyers Magazine in 2017. These outstanding lawyers were honored in their respective areas of practice for attaining a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement – designations awarded to no more than 2.5 percent of California attorneys. In additional to being named Rising Stars, two of the firm’s attorneys were ranked amongst the highest in the Southern California region: Jacqueline Beaumont was selected as one of the Up-And-Coming 50 Women in Southern California, and Kent R. Christensen was selected as one of the Up-And-Coming Southern California 100. Call & Jensen congratulates the following attorneys on their selections as Rising Stars. Jacqueline Beaumont, Samuel G. Brooks, Kent R. Christensen, Jeffrey M. David, Delavan Dickson, John T. Egley, Shirin Forootan, Scott R. Hatch, Aaron L. Renfro, and Joshua G. Simon.
After a hard-fought evidentiary hearing before a federal judge, Call & Jensen attorneys recently defeated a motion for a preliminary injunction in a trademark infringement lawsuit, in which the plaintiff was seeking to preclude the firm’s client from marketing millions of dollars in products with a name that the plaintiff claimed to own a valid trademark for. The successful defeat of the motion allowed Call & Jensen’s client to continue marketing its existing product, achieving business goals, and to reach a favorable settlement agreement regarding the dispute. The team consisted of attorneys Scott Shaw, Debbie Gubernick, and Todd Bouton, and paralegal Halai Hashimi.
Call & Jensen attorneys recently obtained a dismissal of class action allegations for their client in an employment wage-and-hour class action pending in Kern County Superior Court. After the plaintiff former employee filed a class action lawsuit against several different entities involved in oil drilling sites in California, Call & Jensen’s attorneys developed a strategy for limiting the scope of the case to solely the individual plaintiff. After a successful work-up of factual and legal issues, Call & Jensen filed a Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations. The Court granted the motion, effectively reducing the vast majority of potential liability against their client, and removing the “class” from this class action entirely. The team consisted of John Egley, Josh Simon, Chris Dalton, Kevin Jackson, and paralegal Mariam Yusuf.
Call & Jensen is proud to announce that Jacqueline Beaumont and Shirin Forootan were recently selected by the Orange County Business Journal as a 2016 “Women in Business” nominee. Nominees are selected based on significant contributions to their profession and the community. Ms. Beaumont focuses her practice on the representation of clients in complex employment matters. She currently serves as Co-Chair of the OCBA Mommy Esquire Committee, is a member of Girls Inc.’s Women for Girls leadership group, and is a member of the Orange County Bar Association Labor & Employment Section and the Orange County Women Lawyers Association. Ms. Forootan practices exclusively in labor and employment litigation defense and advising. She also serves on the Board of Directors of the Orange County Bar Association and is a member of the Community Impact Cabinet for Orange County United Way.
On April 24, 2017, Call & Jensen attorney, Shirin Forootan, met with several lawmakers in Sacramento on Capitol Hill on behalf of United Way of Orange County. Ms. Forootan advocated the causes of health, financial security, housing, and education for all Orange County families with respect to pending legislation. Ms. Forootan is currently a member of the Community Impact Cabinet of United Way of Orange County.
On November 16, 2016, Call & Jensen attorney, Shirin Forootan, was appointed to the Board of Directors for the Orange County Bar Association for a three-year term. In her capacity as Board Member, she remains committed to carrying out the mission of the OCBA, which is the enhance the system of justice, to support the lawyers who serve it, and to assist the community served by it. Within the OCBA, Ms. Forootan is very active with the homeless task force, amicus alo task force, community outreach committee, and mommy esquire committee.
Call & Jensen secured the complete pretrial dismissal of a high stakes class action complaint against one of the world’s largest personal computer makers. Before dismissal, the Plaintiff sought classwide damages in excess of $100 million.
For more information contact Matt Orr at email@example.com
Call & Jensen attorneys Julie Trotter, Jackie Beaumont and Melinda Evans successfully defended their summary judgment win on appeal in a wrongful termination lawsuit brought against Chevron and two individual supervisors. The lawsuit alleged complex and novel issues regarding the scope of protection afforded non-citizen employees under California’s FEHA. Plaintiff was a high-earning expat seeking over $1.5 million in damages. The Call & Jensen team prevailed on summary judgment at the trial level after securing damaging deposition admissions during a grueling, two-day deposition of plaintiff. Following oral argument, the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in its entirety.
Call & Jensen recently persuaded the Honorable Ann I. Jones of the Los Angeles County Superior Court to deny class certification to a proposed class of more than 1,500 therapists in a wage-and-hour lawsuit. Call & Jensen obtained this victory for its client following more than four years of protracted litigation against class counsel. The attorneys who handled the case were Julie Trotter and Delavan Dickson.
Call & Jensen attorneys recently obtained a complete dismissal with prejudice of all shareholder derivative claims in a business dispute in federal court. Last year, a closely held corporation filed a lawsuit against its former CEO, alleging fraud and misappropriation of millions of dollars. The defendant countered with shareholder derivative claims against the corporation’s Chairman of the Board and Chief Financial Officer. Representing these individual counter-defendants, Call & Jensen attacked the derivative claims, arguing they failed to state any valid claims. Agreeing, the Court dismissed the claims, but afforded the defendant “one final opportunity” to amend. When the defendant tried to allege the derivative claims again, Call & Jensen promptly persuaded the Court that the claims were still invalid. The Court dismissed all the derivative claims with prejudice, thereby removing the board chairman and CFO from the suit. This case was litigated by Matthew R. Orr, William P. Cole, L. Lisa Sandoval, and Jeffrey M. David.
Call & Jensen recently obtained a complete defense judgment for its clients in a hotly-contested, multi-million-dollar lawsuit. Call & Jensen obtained the victory via a summary judgment motion after stepping in to take over the defense following years of protracted litigation. The complaint sought more than $5 million in damages based on alleged violations of state and federal consumer credit reporting laws. Attorneys David R. Sugden and Melinda Evans obtained the complete victory for their clients.
Call & Jensen secured a significant transfer of venue for its client in a business dispute in federal court. Despite the existence of a forum selection clause in the parties’ contract requiring that all disputes “arising out of or relating to” the contract be filed in Florida, where Call & Jensen’s client is based, the Plaintiff filed suit in California, where the alleged work was performed. Call & Jensen’s client had previously filed a contract claim in Florida pursuant to the parties’ agreement. Rather than file a cross-claim in Florida, however, the Plaintiff filed a new suit in California, increasing the litigation costs and burden. Call & Jensen moved to transfer the new case to Florida, which the Plaintiff heavily contested, arguing that the parties’ contract had expired and that the claims for quantum meruit and unjust enrichment were not based on the contract. Call & Jensen, however, persuaded the judge to adopt a newly devised standard for determining the correct venue in light of the forum selection clause, and to transfer the case to Florida. The successful motion was authored by Matthew R. Orr and Joshua G. Simon. William P. Cole provided oral argument at the hearing.
In April 2016, Call & Jensen attorneys Mark Eisenhut and Samuel G. Brooks obtained a complete defense victory on behalf of their client, who is the CEO of a prominent business. After four days of trial, the judge denied all claims and relief sought against Call & Jensen’s client. According to the ruling, evidence presented by Call & Jensen “destroyed [Petitioner’s] credibility and made Petitioner come off as ungrounded and truly bizarre in nature.”
Call & Jensen attorneys Matthew R. Orr and Joshua G. Simon secured a class dismissal with prejudice, in a putative consumer class action proceeding in a Massachusetts federal district court against Gencor, an Orange County-based herbal supplement manufacturer. The proposed class action accused Gencor and other defendants, including General Nutrition Corporation (GNC), of misleading consumers by manipulating scientific data regarding the health effects of the herbal extract fenugreek. Call & Jensen moved to dismiss the lawsuit by attacking all nine legal claims, including those brought under the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act and various California and Massachusetts consumer protection statutes. The U.S. District Judge agreed with Call & Jensen’s arguments in their entirety, and granted the motion to dismiss the firm’s client from the case.