Complaint against Jacob Emrani set to expand

A man who accused Jacob Emrani of charging predatory fees got the go-ahead Thursday to file a proposed second amended complaint with two additional causes of action despite an “ironclad” arbitration provision that the personal injury lawyer’s attorneys say they intend to trigger.

“I think it’s somewhat of a waste of time to go through that process, if indeed, ultimately, we’re going to move toward a motion to compel arbitration,” said Los Angeles Judge David S. Cunningham III.

“However, you would have the right to at least file a motion requesting me, the court, to file the second amended complaint. Because I don’t have that before me, I don’t know what impact it would have on the motion to compel arbitration. Perhaps the better approach would be to have a brief continuance for you to provide a copy of the second amended complaint,” Cunningham continued.

Emrani’s attorney, Michael W. Feenberg, told Cunningham that there is an “ironclad” arbitration provision in the contract with the plaintiff.

“I don’t believe that there’s jurisdiction here for an amended complaint. I’m certainly not unwilling to cooperate, and with respect to facilitating that, but I’m also uncomfortable stipulating to the filing of something that I don’t think should be filed in this court,” he continued. Feenberg is with Nemecek & Cole.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Alex D. Guerrero contends that the motion to compel arbitration should be briefed and decided before any other issue in this case. The plaintiffs wish to file a second amended complaint adding two causes of action for violation of California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 and professional negligence.

“Our position would be that the Business and Professions Code 17200 claim would not be subject to the arbitration provision. We’d like an opportunity to brief that but, our position is essentially, let’s get the second amended complaint on file, have the pleadings in there in hopefully as their final form,” Guerrero told Cunningham.

“If the defense wants to file a motion to compel arbitration, they’re free to do that. We’ll have an opportunity to brief that in its entirety. But, preliminarily, just getting the pleadings in order seems like the most efficient way to proceed from our standpoint,” he continued.

Guerrero accused Emrani and his popular personal injury firm in January of operating as a legal intake mill “wherein the business model is to generate hundreds of client leads through pervasive advertising.”

After signing up a client, the firm allegedly delayed matters, commonly filing lawsuits “shortly before the expiration of applicable statutes of limitations.”

“It was common for Emrani clients to either terminate Emrani’s representation or, if a lawsuit had been filed, for Emrani to be substituted out of the litigation,” Guerrero wrote.

At that point, the firm allegedly invoked two administrative fees the client agreed to when they signed the contract. Marc Mechaly v. Jacob Emrani, 24STCV00030 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed Jan. 2, 2024).

Emrani’s attorney, Feenberg, has denied the claims as “manufactured and frivolous.”

According to the complaint, Marc Mechaly contacted Emrani’s firm after a 2015 car accident, and Emrani filed a complaint just before the statute of limitations ran out. Guerrero wrote that Emrani made a series of “false” statements to Mechaly including that the case was moving forward even though “Mr. Emrani knew that none of the defendants had been served or filed a responsive pleading at the time of Mr. Mechaly’s inquiry.”

“Emrani let the case languish for approximately two years without even serving any of the defendants, before plaintiff terminated Emrani’s legal representation and ultimately hired attorneys Albert J. Elmassian and Alex D. Guerrero” in that case, Guerrero wrote. The Los Angeles-based Elmassian is also representing Mechaly in his case against Emrani.