Cases of Interest

• On behalf of a local school district, defended the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance before the Eastern District, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. The plaintiff alleged that the recitation of the words "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violated the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. Ultimately, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiff as the non-custodial parent did not have standing to bring the suit.
• Represented one of the nation's largest bridge builders against the State of California involving multi-million dollar claims pertaining to air quality issues concerning construction equipment. Case resolved favorably for client prior to trial.
• Successfully negotiated resolution on behalf of a property owner in a complex defeasance, fraud, unlawful detainer action involving a commercial prune-packing facility.
• Obtained summary judgment in favor of a law firm against claims of malpractice that allegedly caused a $20,000,000.00 loss in county tax revenue.
• Successfully defended hospital and two individually named nurses against allegations of Elder Abuse, Wrongful Death, Negligence and Unfair Business Practices resulting in dismissal of claims against the clients without any payment on their behalf.
• Successfully defended a multi-million dollar action alleging inverse condemnation in the form of both regulatory and physical taking arising from denials of development applications and increase flood burden due to public projects.
• Defended one of the world's largest international retail chains in an action filed by a shopper who allegedly sustained severe shoulder and neck injuries when boxes filled with merchandise fell on her in a shopping aisle. The case was resolved with no cost to the client as a result of tender of defense to the vendor/supplier.
• Successfully defended autistic services company and its owners against allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, duty of loyalty, misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, interference with prospective business advantage, and conversion. Defeated request for preliminary injunction and negotiated favorable settlement on behalf of client.
• Successfully disposed of claims asserted against a public entity employee through use of the Anti-SLAPP provision of the California Code of Civil Procedure resulting in an award of attorney's fees to the public entity client.
• Summary judgment granted in the Eastern District on behalf of entity and police officer in pursuit case that alleged the death of the suspect was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Overturned Ninth Circuit ruling by successfully arguing before the United States Supreme Court for a new standard governing the constitutionality of police conduct in pursuit of fleeing suspects resulting in unintentional injuries or death.
• Defended psychiatric care facility in a civil action and multiple administrative investigations arising out of an alleged premature hospital discharge of a schizophrenic patient. The former patient broke through the cockpit of an airliner one month post-9/11 tragedy. The incident was the subject of a "20/20" program in which the passengers spoke of their intervention to restrain and sedate the patient. The incident also contributed to the FAA's implementation of adding locks to cock-pit doors. Porter Scott successfully guided the hospital through the administrative investigations initiated by state, federal and private regulatory authorities and prevailed on summary judgment before the trial court, and upon appeal.
• Prevailed on summary judgment, as well as at the Ninth Circuit, on claims filed against a Sheriff's Department and two deputies for use of deadly force. Deputies shot at plaintiff when he refused to obey commands to stop and drop a three foot long metal sword which he had been carrying throughout a residential neighborhood, exhibiting bizarre and erratic behavior. The deputies shot as plaintiff began to gain access to a residence via the backyard after numerous failed attempts to gain his attention and cooperation. At the time of the shooting, deputies were unaware that the home was the unoccupied home of plaintiff himself. Plaintiff sustained serious injuries and as a result became paraplegic. Both courts held that deadly force was appropriate even where there were no identified third parties to whom the suspect posed a serious threat of harm.
• Successfully obtained dismissal of the Sacramento County Sheriff and Sacramento County via a Summary Judgment Motion on claims that the jail failed to notify a pre-trial detainee of extra-jurisdictional outstanding warrants, detainers, holds or notices, where plaintiff was held over without trial for over six years. Significantly, the District Court determined that the Sheriff was entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity for merely acting as jailor pending criminal proceedings, regardless that those charges were later dropped on Sixth Amendment grounds (violation of right to speedy trial).
• Porter Scott represented an employer who fired an accounting manager for good cause. After being fired, the employee stole private company financial records and mailed them to several of the employer's clients and employees with a cover letter that wrongfully accused the company of having financial difficulties and of stealing client money. Porter Scott was able to immediately have the Superior Court issue a temporary restraining order on the fired employee to prevent her from doing more damage to the company's reputation. Later Porter Scott had a judgment entered against the fired employee to permanently have her not contact the company's clients or employees. She was also compelled to return the stolen computer files.
• Obtained settlements to date exceeding $1,000,000 for the owner of an ultra large single family residential property to cover construction defects, the case continues against remaining defendants.
• Successfully obtained dismissal in favor of retailer when a customer fell off a ladder designated for employee use only.  Plaintiff spotted a ladder designated for employee use only, untied the ladder from a secure location, and climbed up the ladder to retrieve merchandise from the top shelf of a display, despite a sign instructing customers to ask for assistance with merchandise on the top shelf.  Plaintiff fell off the ladder, and claimed the retailer was liable since the ladder created an “acknowledged temptation.”  Porter Scott obtained a defense verdict at arbitration.  Plaintiff asked the arbitrator for an award of $350,000.00.  Plaintiff agreed to dismiss her case a few weeks after the arbitration award.
• Defense verdict in favor of municipality against claims of excessive force and deliberate indifference to plaintiff’s medical needs against a police officer and his law enforcement employer.  Plaintiff was detained in the sobering cell of the jail for DUI and hit and run.  Despite having a .18 blood alcohol level, plaintiff claimed the police department was deliberately indifferent when they deprived him of his mood stabilizing prescription while he was detoxing from alcohol consumption.  Plaintiff also alleged excessive force after he attacked an officer in the sobering cell.  A jury unanimously found in favor of the police department, but were hung (7 to 1 in favor of the officer) as to the individual police officer.  Plaintiff dismissed the officer a few weeks after the verdict.
• Obtained summary judgment in favor of a retailer and pharmacist in pharmacy malpractice claim.  After plaintiff and his caregiver exhibited threatening and menacing behavior, the retailer deactivated plaintiff’s prescription in its computer system, forcing plaintiff to find another pharmacy to refill his prescription.  Plaintiff sued for malpractice over the deactivation of his prescription and the delay in refilling it.  The court granted judgment in favor of the retailer and the pharmacist.
• Summary judgment was granted by the Eastern District of California in favor of the University of California in a heavily litigated Title IX case that was pending for more than four years. The plaintiffs, former UC Davis students, claimed the University failed to accommodate the interests of its female students because women who want to be on the intercollegiate wrestling team at UC Davis are required to try out for the team under the same requirements as male students who want to be on the team. Ruling on an issue of first impression in the Eastern District of California, the judge held that the plaintiffs had failed to give the campus adequate notice of their claim, resulting in its dismissal. In an earlier motion for judgment on the pleadings, Porter Scott was successful in obtaining a ruling dismissing the majority of plaintiffs’ claims on the basis of the statute of limitations and dismissing claims against the individual defendants under 42 USC section 1983 on the basis of statutory pre-emption.  The plaintiffs filed an appeal.  During the pendency of the appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion holding that individuals can be held liable in Title IX cases under section 1983.  The Ninth Circuit recently issued an opinion overturning the lower court on the notice issue and remanding the matter to the district court for further proceedings.  UC Davis, a recognized leader in women’s athletics, continues to vigorously defend against the claims.
• Currently representing one of California’s largest egg producers against federal environmental claims brought by the Humane Society of the United States, related to the animal rights group’s Proposition 2 campaign against factory farms. Along with local residents, the Humane Society of the United States alleges that our client violated the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) for failing to report ammonia emissions from its animal waste. CERCLA and EPCRA were enacted to provide the federal government with broad authority to respond to releases of hazardous waste.