Dallen Trealoff v. Forest River, Inc. / Forest River, Inc. v. Eclipse Recreational Vehicles, Inc.: Plaintiff’s counsel in a six-week jury trial against billionaire Peter Liegl and his company, Forest River, Inc., which is now a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. The jury’s unanimous verdict included findings of fraud and breach of oral contract, along with malice, against both Peter Liegl and Forest River, Inc., and a total monetary judgment of over $17 million, with $15 million in punitive damages. The jury also unanimously rejected Forest River’s claims for misappropriation of trade secrets. BCHV represented plaintiffs Dallen and Joanne Trealoff, a married couple who co-own and operate Eclipse Recreational Vehicles, Inc. (Opposing counsel: Musick Peeler & Garrett)
Gunderson v. Gruys: Plaintiff’s counsel in a four-week jury trial against tax lawyer / CPA defendant. Twenty-five felony counts were pending against the defendant on related issues. The defendant filed a cross-complaint seeking damages of $20 million. Plaintiff sued his former lawyer and accountant for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and theft of funds in connection with tax planning emanating out of the plaintiff’s decision to sell his business for $45 million. The jury came back with an 11-1 vote in favor of the plaintiff on all claims and all defenses, a verdict of $11 million on all of the plaintiff’s claims, and a complete rejection of the entirety of the cross-complaint. (Opposing counsel: Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP)
Jane Doe v. Derrick Rose, Randall Hampton, and Ryan Allen: Mr. Baute, assisted by Ms. Palko, represented NBA athlete Derrick Rose in a two-week civil jury trial in federal court, in which Mr. Rose and two of his closest friends were accused of raping the plaintiff. Race and gender tensions in the case were exacerbated due to inaccurate and sensationalist nationwide media coverage. Obtained a gag order preventing the plaintiff and her counsel from talking to news media about the case. A jury of six women and two men voted unanimously in favor of all three defendants after only two hours of deliberation. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the judgment.
Bulletin Displays, Inc. v. Regency Outdoor Advertising: This was a four week jury trial involving claims against BCHV’s client, Regency Outdoor Advertising, for alleged racketeering and antitrust violations. Mr. Baute and Mr. Crochetiere tried the case for the defendant. Unique challenges to defending this case included an FBI agent testifying against our client, as well as adverse testimony from the former mayor of the City of Lynwood and our client’s former lobbyist, both of whom had been convicted of felonies and were compelled to testify against our client. The plaintiff sought $60,000,000 in damages. After the unanimous verdict in favor of our client, a juror wrote an unsolicited letter to the federal judge stating that she wanted to vote for the plaintiff but that defense counsel’s closing argument was so forceful and persuasive that a “block of five jurors” would not vote for the plaintiff and were able to convince the other three jurors to vote for the defendant. (Opposing counsel: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP)
Howard Entertainment, Inc. v. Lisa Kudrow: This was a two-week jury trial, in which Mr. Baute and Mr. Crochetiere represented the plaintiff, Scott Howard, who alleged that Lisa Kudrow breached an oral contract to pay him 10% of her allocated share of the syndication revenue from the sitcom “Friends.” The case had been litigated for four years prior to BCHV taking over shortly before trial. Expert witnesses were retained on the eve of trial. The jury returned a $2 million verdict against Ms. Kudrow. ABC News broadcast Ms. Kudrow’s cross-examination. Experts on both sides opined on the central issue of whether a 10% oral commission agreement was enforceable after a termination of a business manager’s services, with respect to syndication revenues arising both before and after the termination of services.
In re PacifiCare Life and Health Insurance Company: Steven Velkei acted as lead trial counsel to successfully defend one of the nation’s largest health insurers in the largest enforcement action ever tried by a state agency in the United States, which sought up to $10 billion in penalties against the insurer. Mr. Velkei also successfully defended the decision on appeal.
City of Los Angeles v. Lincoln Place Tenants’ Association: Steven Velkei successfully represented large real estate owner as lead counsel in a highly contentious and difficult redevelopment project in Los Angeles County that had been stalled for years. After successfully defending the company in multiple lawsuits, Mr. Velkei helped negotiate a resolution of the matter with participation by community interests and local, state and federal agencies that paved the way for the $200 million redevelopment project to proceed.
Virtual Media Group, Inc. v. Regency Outdoor Advertising, Inc. Mr. Crochetiere won judgment for the defendant in a 32-day bench trial in a dispute over the ownership of multiple billboards located in Southern California claimed to be worth $17 million. The case was complicated by the testimony of the defendant’s former legal counsel in support of the plaintiff’s claim, and the attempted forgery by the plaintiff of several key documents. Mr. Crochetiere also successfully defended the appeal from the trial court’s decision. (Opposing Counsel: McGuire Woods, LLP)
Outdoor Media Group v. Paul Fisher: Plaintiff’s counsel in four-week jury trial on behalf of outdoor advertising company against former attorney and his law corporation for breaches of fiduciary duties, professional negligence, and intentional interference with economic relationships. Defendants had prevented the plaintiff from acquiring rights to valuable billboard locations visible from major interstate highways. The jury returned a verdict for damages of $13.8 million and a punitive damages award of $1.38 million.
Richard Platt v. Sky Zone, et al.: Steven Velkei successfully defended as lead trial counsel the leading indoor trampoline company in litigation in multiple jurisdictions brought by the company’s founder and other members challenging the strategic decisions of the company and the authority of the company’s managers to act. The successful conclusion of the litigation paved the way for the company, owned by fewer than twenty members, to be sold to a public company for a nine figure purchase price.