Representative Cases
All Cases
Ebner v. Morse Bros., Inc.
(U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, 2009)
Mr. Kent was engaged by a returning Marine, a veteran of the Iraq War, when the Marine's pre-deployment employer failed to reinstate him. The firm filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Marine in federal court based on the veterans' employment protections in USERRA. The company denied liability. After some discovery, the case was resolved with the aid of a federal court judge and a judicial settlement conference setting.
Door Supply v. Alliance Door Products
(State of Oregon, Multnomah County Circuit Court, 2008)
The firm was engaged to pursue civil claims for trade secrets violations, breach of contract, and interference with existing economic relationships when a local manufacturing firm was nearly put out of business by a competitor. After some contentious document discovery and the depositions of former and current employees of the interfering competitor, the case was resolved by mediation.
Harris v. Powers
(Arbitration, Arbitration Service of Portland, 2008)
The firm handled successful arbitration on behalf of a hopeful buyer of a multimillion-dollar home when the seller refused to return the earnest money after the failure of certain conditions of the proposed sale. The arbitrator ruled in favor of the firm's client, awarding return of the $100,000 earnest money, prejudgment interest, costs and attorney fees.
Naumes, Inc. v. Chubb Custom Insurance Company
(U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, 2007)
Naumes is one of Oregon's exceptional, family-owned businesses. It owns orchards in Southwest Oregon and produces juices and juice mixes in Oregon and northern California. It was named as one of several defendants in a California lawsuit over a product recall. The liability alleged against the defendants in California amounted to millions of dollars and the case required complicated discovery in California, Oregon and Japan. Naumes tendered its defense to its insurance company, which denied coverage despite several demands. The firm was retained by Naumes to file a lawsuit to enforce the terms of Chubb's policy. In January, 2007, the court granted Naumes's summary judgment motion against the insurer, resulting in coverage for in excess of $1 million in litigation expenses for our client.
Tucker v. Oregon Aero
(U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, 2007)
The firm's client participated in the invention of a helmet pad kit with exceptional shock-absorbing properties just as the military's need for such products was accelerating. We filed suit alleging damages for breach of an oral agreement for payment of a percentage of the company's sales -- an obligation of several million dollars for just a few years. The matter was resolved days before trial following completion of the parties' depositions, exchange of expert discovery, and the court's decision on cross-motions for summary judgment.
Asato v. Dunn and Morando
(State of Oregon, Multnomah County Circuit Court, 2004; Oregon Court of Appeals, 2006)
In a breach of fiduciary duty case initiated by foreign investors against the firm's Oregon clients, the firm won dismissal of the case with prejudice as a sanction for the plaintiffs' willful failure to participate in discovery, including failure to produce financial documents the court agreed would be necessary to the defendants. In addition to statutory court costs, the trial judge made a rare award of the statutory maximum prevailing party fee to our client. The firm's result was wholly affirmed by the Oregon Court of Appeals. Our client had been facing claims for more than $2 million in damages.
Black v. KOGAP Enterprises, Inc.
(U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, 2006)
On behalf of the plaintiff, the firm filed a complaint in federal court alleging fraud under state securities law and common law. The matter was resolved in an early mediation with minimal discovery expense.
Kennedy v. Dorsey
(State of Oregon, Clackamas County Circuit Court, 2006)
The firm recently represented a trustee in a bitter family fight involving the distribution of estate assets. The plaintiff claimed that the firm's client owed hundreds of thousands of dollars to their mother's estate. The case turned on the presentation of a pivotal piece of evidence - the hearsay statement of the mother to her daughters that she had forgiven the subject loans to the family business. After a week of trial, the judge ruled in favor of our client that the loans had been forgiven.
Roeder v. PacifiCorp Financial Services
(U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, 2006)
The firm filed an action for collection of wages and lost benefits in an effort to enforce the company's obligation to perform on a long-term incentive program. Our client was responsible for implementing a tax-advantaged energy strategy that had multi-million-dollar benefits for his employer. Our successful opposition to summary judgment motions by the defendant aimed at disposing of the entire case rested on the court's adoption of our promissory estoppel argument based on evidence that our client had turned down other employment opportunities in order to earn the incentives.
Double D Industries, Inc. v. Farris
(State of Oregon, Multnomah County Circuit Court, 2005)
The firm was asked to take over defense of a matter two weeks before trial when the plaintiff's counsel claimed to need the original attorney as a trial witness. Our client was being sued for breach of a non-compete agreement, facing claims for $800,000 in lost profits and a permanent injunction. The firm won a complete defense verdict for our client.
KnowledgePoints Development Corp. v. Learning Centers of Central Florida, LLC
(U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, and AAA Arbitration, 2005)
The firm was engaged to represent five unrelated franchisees seeking to terminate their relationship with a franchisor that marketed a system for private tutoring. The franchisor was represented by an international law firm with a prominent national specialist in franchise law. In the first case, we defeated the franchisor's federal court motion for a preliminary injunction that would have effectively destroyed our client's business. The merits of that case were then presented to a panel of three arbitrators. Following a week of evidence and argument, the panel resolved the case wholly in favor of our client. All five of the cases were ultimately settled in mediation.
Magliana v. Turning Point Capital, LLC
(State of Oregon, Multnomah County Circuit Court, 2005)
A lawyer sued our client claiming that he had orally promised to pay the lawyer's fee for services the lawyer provided to another party. The case posed unusual legal and evidentiary issues arising from the lawyer's effort to enforce an oral agreement that was not confirmed by any writing. The jury returned a complete defense verdict in favor of our client.
Trotti v. Skedco, Inc.
(State of Oregon, Washington County Circuit Court, 2005)
For the widow of a shareholder in a closely-held corporation, we filed claims for oppressive conduct, breach of fiduciary duty, and judicial dissolution against the remaining shareholders. The true value of the shares of the corporation was a significant asset of the deceased's estate. The matter was resolved through early mediation and settlement negotiations without significant investment in litigation.
Naito v. Naito
(State of Oregon, Multnomah County Circuit Court, 2004)
The firm represented the position of H. Naito Corporation in a shareholder dispute between two branches of the founder's family. The dispute was over control of a substantial commercial real property portfolio, including many properties of historic significance in downtown Portland, and was the subject of multiple actions in the trial court and appellate court over a period of approximately 10 years.
Pacific Bells Enterprises, Inc. v. U.S. Bank National Association
(U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington, 2004)
The firm's client granted a neighboring branch of its local bank a 25-year easement in return for a briefly-worded waiver of banking fees. U.S. Bank acquired the local bank, but objected to the terms of the original easement. We initiated a declaratory judgment action against the Bank which was tried before Judge Leighton in the fall of 2004. A verdict in favor of the firm's client was recently affirmed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The client will save millions of dollars in banking fees over the remaining life of the easement.
Ford v. GST Telecommunications, Inc.
(State of Oregon, Multnomah County Circuit Court, 2003)
The firm was asked to take over for prior defense counsel on the eve of trial in another situation where the opposing counsel disclosed an intention to call the firm's client's original counsel as a witness. The plaintiff was suing for damages for alleged breach of an employment agreement and stock option agreement by his former employer, and sought to pierce the corporate veil. The firm obtained reset of the trial, used the intervening time to develop additional evidence, and obtained resolution through negotiation on the eve of the new trial setting.
Adkisson/Chrome Systems Corporation
(State of Delaware, Court of Chancery; ASP Arbitration, 2002)
The firm was engaged to represent the interests of a chief executive officer who had been separated from the software company (that he founded) following an influx of venture capital. The venture capital firm brought in its own national counsel, converted the local software company to a Delaware corporation, then filed a legal action against the CEO in Delaware. We initiated a local arbitration for the CEO pursuant to the company's employment handbook. The arbitration survived motions to dismiss and, in the midst of the firm's challenge to the Delaware court's jurisdiction over the matter, the parties were referred by the trial judge to a settlement conference pursuant to Delaware rule where the matter was resolved.
Stephens v. Zamora
(Marion County Circuit Court, 2002)
The firm represented the plaintiff in a personal injury action. The case was subject to the court's arbitration program. When plaintiff prevailed, defendant's insurer appealed for trial de novo. Plaintiff prevailed again at trial. We obtained an even better judgment at trial than at the arbitration, won attorney fees as a result of the insurer's unsuccessful appeal, and won the maximum statutory prevailing party fee in light of the defendant-insurer's failed strategy.
Monson v. Papa Murphy's International, Inc.
(State of Washington, Clark County Superior Court, 2001)
The firm defended franchisor Papa Murphy's against a succession of lawsuits asserted by unsuccessful franchisees. When the first of these cases went to trial, the firm won a motion directing a verdict in favor of the franchisor, resulting in a defense judgment and an award of $73,733 for our defendant-client at the conclusion of the plaintiff's evidence. The firm's petition for its client's attorney fees was also successful.
SEC v. Capital Consultants/Washington Alder, LLC
(U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, 2001)
Our client, Washington Alder, LLC, was among a large class of borrowers injured by the collapse of Capital Consultants, Inc., the resulting appointment of a receiver to control CCI's assets, and intense investor and court supervision. Washington Alder was singled out by the receiver's counsel as a test case for application of an aging legal principle called the D'oench Duhme doctrine in an attempt to limit the borrowers' claims against CCI. Our firm successfully defeated pivotal motions preserving not only Washington Alder's position against CCI, but those of many other members of the borrower class.
Klamath Pacific International v. Weyerhaeuser
(U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, 2000)
Weyerhaeuser had agreed to sell several million dollars worth of timberlands and mills in southern Oregon to KPI pursuant to a letter of intent, but then refused to consummate the sale claiming that KPI did not have the financial capability to complete the transaction. The firm was engaged to initiate litigation for KPI on a breach of contract theory. Proof of KPI's ability to perform was challenging because it was a start-up organized specifically for the purpose of completing the purchase from Weyerhaeuser. After two years of litigation activity and a lengthy trial in federal court, the jury returned a verdict in favor of KPI in excess of $12.1 million. The case settled during a judicial settlement conference shortly after trial.