|
| Contact Us |
| |
320 Golden Shore, Suite 410
Long Beach, California 90802
Phone: (562) 432-7422
Fax: (562) 432-8682
|
| |
2415 Campus Drive, Suite 250
Irvine, California 92162
Phone: (949) 679-9823
Fax: (949) 266-9181
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Marron Lawyers Firm News |
 |
Employment Law / Class Action:
A Key Trial Win For Businesses Under Attack From Dishonest Competitors
Senior trial attorney Ron Chavez of Marron Lawyers won a key trial victory for one of the nation's largest taxi fleets -- as well as all California businesses that operate lawfully and wish to put an end to illegal and dishones competitors.
A predatory competitor, funded by secreted venture capital money, began operating illegally in various cities where the Firm's client is licensed to operate. The intentional interference sought to destabilize the financial base of the Firm's client, so that the competitor could commence a market take-over effort. This competitor used a fraudulent $2 million fleet insurance certificate; shoddy vehicle maintenance and underpaid drivers to reduce operating expenses by numbers in the high hundreds of thousands, therby enabling it to undercut retail pricing and engage in illegal pick-ups of passengers in cites where the competitor was not licensed.
In a trial victory of major significance under California's drastically cut-back unfair competition law (UCL), Mr. Chavez and second-chair attorney Afshin Mozaffari successfully established the now-very-difficult -to-prove elements of "standing" and "injury-in-fact". They secured a permanent injunction barring the illegal competitor and all associated drivers from taxi operations in Los Angeles and five Southeast LA County cities - as well as money damages againt the competitor and personally against its President.
The Firm's trial team of Chavez and Mozaffari also proved tenacious pre-trial litigators, extracting a paper trail of doctored insurance certificates from uncooperative insurance brokers and government officials reluctant to admit they had been duped. In dramatic cross examination, the defendant's President acknowledged his personal involvement in issuance of the certificate - and that the address for the purportedly issuing broker was a cemetery located two blocks from the competitor's business.
At the conclusion of this hard fought trial, the court concluded that the Firm presented "honest, credible and acceptable" evidence of the defendent's illegal operations. Apart from the permanent injunction and damages awarded, the Court authorized the Firm to seek attorney fees under a public benefit theory. The Firm expects and award of $200,000-plus in fees.
The Firm's lawyers have a unique and special expertise available to businesses facing competitors willing to engage in dishonest business practices to gain a competitive advantage.
The Firm Enforces Arbitration Agreements for Employers
In a Colorado case, Steve Rice and Victoria Wood obtained enforcement of an arbitration agreement against 20+ independent contractors who claimed they were employees. Represented by one of Colorado's most successful plantiffs firms, the plaintiffs filed employment claims in federal court in Denver, in an attempt to avoid the arbitration agreement they had voluntarily signed and to avoid the contractual requirement that the plaintiffs pay a share of arbitration costs. As a result of successful maneuvering by the Firm's attorneys, the Federal Court case has been dismissed and the plaintiffs have been ordered to pay $30,000 in arbitration costs.
A $100,000,000+ Win!
Marron Lawyers won a major victory in the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California in Roosevelt Kairy et al. v. SuperShuttle International, Inc. et al. (Case number). The plaintiffs, current and former drivers of SuperShuttle vans had sued under California law, claiming that they had been misclassified as independent contractors, and seeking damages under various Labor Code sections as well as the Unfair Competition Law. They later amended their complaint to add federal Fair Labor Standards Act claims. The Marron Lawyers class action team, led by Steve Rice, persuaded the court to dismiss all of the California causes of action, effectively reducing the plaintiffs¹ claims by $120 - $130 million.
Read the Order: Read the Press Release:
Case Dismissed and Attorney Fees Awarded
Ronald Chavez, of Marron Lawyers, won a summary judgment against 19 former independent contractor/franchisee airport shuttle van drivers. The drivers¹ franchise contracts were terminated because they engaged in conduct that materially and unfavorably reflected upon the operation and reputation of our transportation client during a demonstration at Los Angeles International Airport. Plaintiffs alleged that the termination of their contracts violated California franchise laws, that they were fraudulently induced to enter into the contacts, and that the termination violated their constitutional rights. The plaintiffs collectively sought damages in excess of $2 million. The court not only dismissed the complaint in its entirety, but awarded attorney fees to our client. We are currently collecting those fees for our client.
Read the Order
An Arbitrator¹s Order Saves our Client $50,000 in Costs
The Colorado arbitrator agreed with Ronald Chavez and Victoria Wood, of Marron Lawyers, that the arbitration should proceed under the American Arbitration Association¹s commercial rules, where each side bears its own costs. Last year, a group of 23 former and current taxi drivers, several of whom had formed their own company in competition with our client, filed a demand for arbitration claiming discrimination, harassment, retaliation in violation of U.S.C. § 1981 and state law causes of action. The claimants filed a motion to have the arbitration governed under the AAA employment rules, rather than the AAA commercial rules in accordance with signed independent contractor agreements. Had the arbitrator granted claimants¹ motion, our client would have had to pay the arbitration costs for the claimants, which will amount to approximately $50,000. Now, if the claimants want to proceed, they will have to pay their own costs up front.
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
