Appeals
Klapach & Klapach, P.C. has represented clients in appeals and writs involving nearly every area of the law, including business disputes, torts, contracts, constitutional rights, criminal law, intellectual property, professional liability, employment, real estate, bankruptcy, and securities. Many of these appeals have involved high-profile, high-stakes cases, and dozens have resulted in published decisions.
Joseph S. Klapach is a Certified Specialist in Appellate Law with the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization, and he has been named as one of the Top 100 Appellate Attorneys in California by the American Society of Legal Advocates for the past decade.
Representative Appeals:
Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Lara, 84 Cal.App.5th 1119 (2022) – The firm defended a national retailer in an appeal brought by an insurance company after the retailer challenged the legality of certain side agreements to the insurer’s policies.
Result: The Court of Appeal upheld that the Insurance Commissioner’s jurisdiction and ruled that the insurance company’s side agreements were illegal.
Mateen-Bradford v. City of Compton, 2021 WL 5002230 (2021) – The firm represented the City of Compton in an appeal seeking to overturn a $1.5 million jury verdict and attorney’s fee award against the City.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed the jury’s verdict and ordered a new trial for the City of Compton.
In re: Frank Lane Italiane, Jr., 632 B.R. 662 (2021) – The firm defended a group of investors against an appeal brought by a corporate insider who sought to discharge the investor’s $1.5 million judgment in bankruptcy.
Result: The Court of Appeal ruled that the $1.5 million judgment was not dischargeable in bankruptcy.
Pope v. Even St. Productions, Ltd., 2021 WL 4304710 (2021) – The firm represented a prominent musician and manager in an appeal involving ownership of the music performance royalties for the 1970s funk band War.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment against the client manager and directed the trial court to conduct a trial to determine who owns the music royalties.
Hudson v. Foster, 68 Cal.App.5th 640 (2021) – The firm represented a former conservatee who sought to reopen an accounting on the ground that his former conservator had stolen money from the conservatorship.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court, holding that the evidence did not support a finding that the conservatee was aware of the misstatements in the accounting at the time the accounting was approved.
Pine Valley, Inc. v. Ajinomoto North America, 2019 WL 1529315 (2019) – The firm represented a food manufacturer in an appeal brought by a competitor after a verdict awarding over $10 million in damages and royalties.
Result: The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in favor of the firm’s food manufacturer client.
Farmers & Merchants Trust Company, 33 Cal.App.5th 638 (2019) – The firm represented the principals of an oil exploration business in challenging a $4 million jury verdict entered against them.
Result: The Court of Appeal struck the punitive damages award of $3.25 million.
Placer Foreclosure, Inc. v. Aflalo, 23 Cal.App.5th 1109 (2018) – The firm represented a former homeowner in an appeal against a foreclosure trustee who refused to release $974,786 in surplus proceeds.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court and directed the trustee to release the surplus proceeds to the homeowner client immediately.
City of Long Beach v. City of Los Angeles, 19 Cal.App.5th 465 (2018) – The firm represented a coalition of prominent Los Angeles businesses in challenging a trial court’s judgment setting aside the environmental impact statement prepared by the Port of Los Angeles for the planned expansion of the Burlington Northern railyard.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court and held that the environmental impact statement satisfied the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act in all but one minor respect.
Out of the Box Enterprises, LLC v. El Paseo Jewelry Exchange, Inc., 732 Fed.Appx. 532 (9th Cir. 2018) – The firm represented a jeweler in an appeal from an adverse $2.4 million jury verdict in an unfair competition action.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed $2.4 million verdict and directed entry of judgment of no liability in favor of the client jeweler.
The International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, etc. v. NASSCO Holdings Inc., 17 Cal.App.5th 1105 (2017) – The firm defended a labor union in an appeal brought by a shipbuilding employer after the trial court ruled that the employer had violated the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (“WARN Act”).
Result: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment in favor of the client labor union, holding that the WARN Act applies to temporary layoffs.
Lopez v. Routt, 17 Cal.App.5th 1006 (2017) – The firm defended a city employee who won a $1 million judgment against the City of Beverly Hills in an employment case against an individual supervisor who sought his attorney’s fees.
Result: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order refusing to award attorney’s fees against the firm’s employee client.
Klein v. City of Beverly Hills, 865 F.3d 1276 (9th Cir. 2017) – The firm represented a civil rights plaintiff in a judicial deception claim against the City of Beverly Hills.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s ruling that the client civil rights plaintiff’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations.
Pom Wonderful LLC v. Hubbard, 775 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir. 2014) – The firm represented a national manufacturer of pomegranate juice in an appeal from the district court’s order denying a preliminary injunction against an energy drink manufacturer for trademark infringement.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed trial court’s denial of preliminary injunction and held that the firm’s pomegranate juice manufacturer client had established its protected interest in the “POM” mark.
People v. Ligons, 84 Cal.App.4th 808 (2010) – The firm represented an indigent defendant in a criminal appeal.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed the defendant’s convictions for attempted escape and assault.
Bell v. Mason, 194 Cal.App.4th 1102 (2011) – The frirm represented a real estate broker in an appeal from an adverse jury verdict for $900,000 for fraud and dependent adult abuse.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed the $900,000 jury verdict in the plaintiff’s favor and directed the trial court to enter judgment of no liability in favor of the firm’s broker client.
Concerned Citizens of South Central Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles, 2011 WL 1889418 (2011) – The firm represented a non-profit organization in an appeal from an adverse judgment awarding $4.8 million in condemnation proceeds to the City of Los Angeles.
Result: The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s judgment and directed the trial court to award the $4.8 million in condemnation proceeds to the firm’s non-profit client.
Manshardt v. Federal Judicial Qualifications Committee et al., 408 F.3d 1154 (2005) – The firm’s attorney defended a federal judge selection committee established by President George W. Bush and Senators Feinstein and Boxer against a lawsuit challenging the committee process on statutory and constitutional grounds.
Result: The Court of Appeal ruled in the client committee’s favor and affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the lawsuit.