General Civil Case Studies
Taxpayer Action
Result:
Favorable result for client.
Client:
Ted Smith, Resident and Taxpayer of City of San Jose
Overview:
Smith’s taxpayer action challenged the City’s prohibition on an individual’s right to make a contribution during the last 17 days before a municipal election or the last seven days before a special election (“the blackout periods”), as an unconstitutional ban on the right to engage in political expression and an individual’s freedom of association. Although the City claimed it had a legitimate government interest in promoting transparency, no such blackout period exists during this critical time of an election under federal or California state law, or under the laws of any other major City in California. Rather, these governing bodies require that such “late” contributions are reported by a candidate within 24 hours, and instantly electronically posted on the web for transparency. After a bench trial, the Honorable James Kleinberg ruled in Smith’s favor, holding that the blackout periods do not comport with the First Amendment’s guarantees of freedom of speech and political expression.
McManis Faulkner Obtains $11.3 Settlement
Result:
An $11.3 million settlement.
Client:
Jerry Kielty, a shotcrete concrete pump operator and general construction worker
Overview:
McManis Faulkner obtained an $11.3 million settlement for Jerry Kielty, a 54-year-old shotcrete concrete pump operator, who fell through an unguarded open hole at a construction site in San Jose. Kielty also successfully settled with his worker’s compensation carrier, which guaranteed payments of his medical bills for life.
The case, Kielty v. Advent, et al., was litigated in Santa Clara County Superior Court and involved 10 defendants, including the general contractor, carpentry contractor, masonry contractor, developers, fire sprinkler company and other subcontractors. The defendants contended they took all reasonable steps to maintain workplace safety and that the plaintiff was at fault for the accident.
After four years in court that saw the defeat of numerous summary judgment motions, McManis Faulkner successfully negotiated a global settlement with the defendants. The firm then worked with the client to obtain a trust to ensure care for him for the rest of his life.
MF Obtains Large Settlement for Computer Hardware Manufacturer
Result:
McManis Faulkner obtained substantial settlement to the satisfaction of the client.
Client:
Major Computer Hardware Manufacturer
Overview:
A private security firm failed to protect the extremely valuable property of a major computer hardware manufacturer from theft. As a result, the computer hardware manufacturer represented by McManis Faulkner filed suit. The ensuing litigation was tough-fought, with the security firm disclaiming responsibility for its employee’s theft of property and refusing to pay any damages. McManis Faulkner ultimately obtained a sizable settlement from the security firm in an amount representing the value of the stolen property.
MF Obtains Unanimous Jury Verdict
Result:
Unanimous jury verdict in favor of defendant
Client:
Feld Entertainment, Inc., a privately-held company that owns and operates the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus.
Overview:
The firm represented the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus in an action brought by two long time, self-proclaimed animal rights activists in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The activists had a long history of litigating against public entities and private arenas where the circus performs. They claim civil rights violations and typically their litigation efforts end in private settlements. However, in this instance when the activists directly sued the circus, the firm was successful in severely cutting out plaintiffs’ claims through dispositive motions, so that only two claims went to trial. Plaintiffs alleged their efforts to videotape circus activities were interfered with. The circus argued that there was no interference and that much of plaintiffs’ videotaping efforts were directed to an area that had previously been adjudicated to be a “non-public forum” where plaintiffs did not have permission to videotape. After nearly two weeks of trial, the matter was submitted to the jury, which returned (in just over an hour) a unanimous verdict in favor of the circus.
McManis Faulkner Obtains Ninth Circuit Ruling
Result:
U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned District Court decision.
Client:
Rahinah Ibrahim, a Stanford graduate student from Malaysia
Overview:
McManis Faulkner successfully represented Rahinah Ibrahim, a Stanford graduate student, who found herself inexplicably on the No-Fly List. Ibrahim was arrested at San Francisco International Airport in 2005 before being allowed to fly to her native Malaysia for an academic conference. She was not allowed to return to the U.S. due to her ‘No-Fly’ List status.
Filing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, government lawyers argued that with the passage of 49 USC Section 46110 by Congress, federal judges had no jurisdiction over the Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration (TSA). As such, only appellate courts have jurisdiction over such cases, making them impossible to litigate because appellate courts cannot take evidence and had no lower court decision – complete with evidence – to review and reconsider.
In a decided victory, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to allow federal trial judges to investigate the make-up of the ‘No-Fly’ List. The court held that the Terrorist Screening Center, the agency that compiles the list, is part of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which is not listed in 49 USC Section 46110.
McManis Faulkner then filed a suit in U.S. District Court to have Ibrahim's name removed; however, Judge William Alsup dismissed the suit. He ruled that Ibrahim had no constitutional rights at stake because she was a foreigner who had left the U.S. voluntarily.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the District Court decision, ruling that Ibrahim had significant U.S. connections - she had spent four years as a graduate student at Stanford, traveled abroad only to present her research at a Stanford-sponsored conference, and would have returned for academic and personal visits if the government hadn't barred her.
Trade Secrets and Unfair Competition
Result:
Obtained settlement agreement from former employees and a competitor to refrain from soliciting customers or employees of client.
Client:
Large Pharmaceutical Supplier
Overview:
A high-level local employee of an out-of-state pharmaceutical supplier left the company to start a competing business in California. In conjunction with an arbitration proceeding in another state, McManis Faulkner successfully obtained the pre-litigation agreement of the former employee and competing business to cease and refrain from soliciting customers and employees of the company.
Wrongful Arrest
Result:
Negotiated a $300,000 settlement.
Client:
High-level Executive
Overview:
McManis Faulkner represented a high-level executive in a civil suit for wrongful arrest based on a shoddy investigation and outrageous conduct by the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s office. The executive retained McManis Faulkner after being arrested for dental insurance fraud, handcuffed and taken from her workplace, and later cleared of a crime she did not commit. The client suffered the shock and humiliation of her arrest in front of her co-workers and the severe emotional distress of being imprisoned for more than eight hours, as well as a bill for legal services to clear her name that exceeded $10,000. The client received $300,000 in the settlement.
Elder Abuse and Fraud
Result:
A $1 million settlement after writ of attachment.
Client:
Elderly Couple
Overview:
An elderly couple was swindled by a financial planner and his controlled companies. McManis Faulkner moved swiftly to obtain a writ attaching all the defendants’ real property and other assets, leading to a prompt settlement secured by real property for return of all of the clients’ money, plus interest and attorney’s fees, and for entry of judgment against the defendants if they failed to perform. Obtaining an immediate temporary protective order and writ of attachment freezing all of the defendants’ assets saved a large amount of attorney’s fees and the emotional toll a trial would have had on the 90 year-old clients.