For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
Daily appellate reports
Sign up for Daily Journal emails
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court
Name Category Published
Osornio v. Weingarten
Estate planning attorney owed duty of care to donee nonclient under facts as may be alleged in amended complaint. 		Attorneys Jan. 11, 2005
Benasra v. Mitchell, Silberberg & Knupp
Anti-SLAPP motion to strike should not have been granted in case regarding attorney breach of duty of loyalty. 		Attorneys Jan. 11, 2005
In re Oheb
Attorney convicted of accepting clients with false insurance claims did not deserve summary disbarment. 		Attorneys Jan. 10, 2005
Matter of Luis
Attorney whose probation was revoked for actual suspension can be required to show rehabilitation and fitness. 		Attorneys Dec. 15, 2004
Applicant B v. State Bar
Rules Governing State Bar Program for Certifying Legal Specialists deprive State Bar Court of jurisdiction to consider procedural due process challenge. 		Attorneys Dec. 9, 2004
Eddy v. Fields
No work product privilege existed when attorney turned over trust documents to other attorney. 		Attorneys Nov. 19, 2004
In re North
District of Arizona may limit membership to attorneys who are active members in good standing of State Bar of Arizona. 		Attorneys Nov. 9, 2004
Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft
No ineffective assistance of counsel exists where it was immigration lawyer's incorrect analysis of new rules that led petitioner to file doomed asylum application. 		Attorneys Nov. 9, 2004
Aguilar v. Lerner
Attorneys are found in contempt of court for failing to appear for oral argument and lying to court. 		Attorneys Nov. 9, 2004
In re Respondent AA
Hearing judge did not abuse discretion by dismissing formal disciplinary proceeding against attorney. 		Attorneys Oct. 21, 2004
Collins v. State
Attorney who inadvertently hired expert witness who had previously worked for opposing party should not have been disqualified. 		Attorneys Oct. 7, 2004
La Jolla Cove Motel and Hotel Apartments Inc. v. Superior Court (Jackman)
Attorneys may contact directors of represented corporation as long as directors' separate counsel consents to contact. 		Attorneys Oct. 5, 2004
Eddy v. Fields
No work product privilege existed when attorney turned over trust documents to other attorney. 		Attorneys Sep. 30, 2004
Mink v. Maccabee
Fee-splitting arrangement between two attorneys is enforceable despite client's belated acceptance of arrangement. 		Attorneys Sep. 27, 2004
McIntosh v. Mills
Fee-sharing agreement between attorney and non-attorney is unenforceable under doctrine of illegality of contract. 		Attorneys Sep. 23, 2004
Janik v. Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff
Attorneys for class-action plaintiffs owe a duty to assert viable claims arising out of the same facts as certified claims. 		Attorneys Aug. 23, 2004
Tipton-Whittingham v. City of Los Angeles
NInth Circuit certifies to California Supreme Court questions regarding attorney fees. 		Attorneys Aug. 23, 2004
Farris v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Co.
Substantial relationship between attorney's prior coverage work for insurer and current representation of insured in bad-faith claim warrants disqualification. 		Attorneys Aug. 23, 2004
Janik v. Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff
Attorneys for class-action plaintiffs owe a duty to assert viable claims arising out of the same facts as certified claims. 		Attorneys Aug. 23, 2004
Harrigfeld v. Hancock
Plaintiffs concede they lacked standing to bring legal malpractice action against defendant. 		Attorneys Aug. 15, 2004
Liska v. Arns Law Firm
Client who loses binding fee arbitration may file subsequent lawsuit against attorney for misconduct. 		Attorneys Aug. 9, 2004
Gadda v. Ashcroft
Reciprocal discipline imposed on attorney by federal courts based on California State Bar Court suspension order is valid. 		Attorneys Aug. 8, 2004
Zamos v. Stroud
Attorney who files lawsuit, then discovers it lacks probable cause, liable for malicious prosecution for continuing to prosecute suit after that discovery. 		Attorneys Jul. 30, 2004
Moran v. Oso Valley Greenbelt Assn.
Plaintiff entitled to award of attorney fees in suit against corporation for failure to produce records. 		Attorneys Jul. 28, 2004
Aguilar v. Lerner
Because plaintiff waived his rights under Mandatory Fee Arbitration Act, preexisting arbitration agreement with attorney was enforceable. 		Attorneys Jul. 28, 2004
Gold v. Weissman
In legal malpractice action, attorney's representation of plaintiff was continuous and tolled statute of limitations. 		Attorneys Jul. 26, 2004
Addam v. Superior Court (Melanie Addam)
Sibling relationship between lawyer and opposing party's physician is insufficient to preclude lawyer from representing client. 		Attorneys Jul. 26, 2004
Derivi Construction & Architecture Inc. v. Wong
Attorney is not necessarily disqualified from case due to his marriage to attorney whose law firm was previously disqualified. 		Attorneys Jul. 25, 2004
Fletcher v. Davis
Attorney must obtain client's written consent to secure hourly fees by obtaining charging lien against future recovery because interest is adverse to client. 		Attorneys Jul. 25, 2004
Venture Law Group v. Superior Court (Singhania)
Attorney of merged client corporation may not answer deposition questions without violating attorney-client privilege now held by successor corporation. 		Attorneys Jul. 2, 2004
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.