On December 18, 2020, Esther Choe of Macdonald & Cody, LLP obtained a favorable ruling in Orange County, granting Defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion and striking Plaintiffs’ entire unlimited complaint for malicious prosecution against Defendant.
Defendant claimed to be the victim of fraud and manipulation by her business partners and friends as well as the attorneys that represented them. She turned to the Court to redress the wrongs committed against her, but she was only partially successful. Her former business partners were dismissed from her lawsuit and then filed a malicious prosecution action against her, seeking over $150,000.00 in general damages as well as punitive damages.
Esther Choe filed an anti-SLAPP motion to strike Plaintiffs’ complaint against Defendant. After extensive briefing and oral argument the Court issued its ruling in favor of Defendant, granting Defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion, denying Plaintiffs’ request for attorney’s fees and costs, and allowing Defendant to file a motion for attorney’s fees and costs against Plaintiffs.Read More
On March 5, 2020, Scott Macdonald of Macdonald & Cody, LLP obtained a successful verdict in Long Beach, CA. The case involved a 91 year old man who sustained a complete fracture of his femur after being forced to the ground by debris from a shattered trash dumpster enclosure which had been struck by the 93 year old defendant.
The plaintiff is a retired Navy Veteran. He was forced to undergo placement of an intramedullary nail placement. Thereafter he had one month of hospitalization and in-patient rehabilitation care. He then transferred home and had in-home care and assistance of relatives. While he managed to attend a tribute to Veterans in Washington D.C., “Honor Flight”, he was forced to do so while confined to a wheelchair. While he made a miraculous recovery, testimony from family members established that the plaintiff was not the same individual that he was prior to the accident.
Pre-trial negotiations were attempted. Plaintiff would previously not negotiate from their $1.5 million dollar demand. Prior to trial, plaintiff demanded $750,000 but would not come below that number. The defense offered $300,000 with indications that more money would be offered in negotiations. Plaintiff’s C.C.P. Section 998 offer prior to trial was $750,000, and the defense 998 was for $300,000. The jury awarded $350,000.Read More