McCubbery v. Boise Cascade; & Head v. Boise Cascade; Mancini v. GAC; Weiss v. GAC; O’Neil v. Horizon Corporation. L&H successfully prosecuted several of the first major consumer class actions in the United States. The fundamental claims were for investor fraud in connection with sales of undeveloped property through the use of misleading high pressure sales tactics. Each of these cases was settled in the 1970’s for recovery that included re-design of the paper communities involved, cash payments and reductions in purchase prices.

In Re Arizona Dairy Products Litigation. L&H represented the State of Arizona in antitrust litigation against the country’s major dairy producers. After the class was notified by having the notice printed on defendants’ milk cartons, the case settled on the eve of trial for more than $15 million. Then Attorney General Corbin described the recovery as the largest in the history of the state.

Cavanaugh v. Zell. L&H prosecuted a misrepresentation claim on behalf of the sellers of a Reno, Nevada office building and apartment building, against an investor and tax specialist lawyers recommended to the sellers by the investor. The case was settled during the jury trial in the late 1970’s on confidential terms.

Brinker v. Amalgamated Sugar Company, see State of California v. California and Hawaiian Sugar Co., 588 F.2d 1270 (9th Cir. 1978). L&H represented a class of California consumers against the major domestic sugar producers. The Brinker case established law that California indirect sugar producers were entitled to assert Cartwright Act price fixing claims in a state court. After the 9th Circuit ordered the case remanded to state courts, the case was finally settled in plaintiffs’ favor.

Murphy v. Shipowners and Merchants Tugboat Company. L&H represented a competitor in a section 2 antitrust case alleging monopoly of the tugboat industry on San Francisco Bay. The case was successfully tried to a jury and resulted in the opening up of San Francisco Bay to competition in the tugboat business.

Cole v. Benvenutti. L&H represented defendant Cahill Commercial Brokerage and Sacramento's leading real estate development firm in a six-months jury trial that resulted in a hung jury. The plaintiffs’ multi-million dollar claims that the defendants were lured away from lucrative employment by the Benvenutti family on the basis of false promises of future employment were thereafter settled on very favorable but confidential terms for our client.

Findley v. U.S. Life. L&H prosecuted a class action alleging the defendant was responsible for financial fraud by a financial services representative. The case was settled just prior to jury trial in 1982 on terms that resulted in full recovery for the class members.

Liston v. U.S. Life. A case that was brought by L&H on behalf of two larger investors who opted to be excluded from the Findley class action. The case was settled on confidential terms favorable to plaintiffs during jury trial.

Exel v. S.W. Forest Industries. L&H represented the European distributor of box making machines against the defendant for antitrust and breach of contract claims. After a successful jury verdict, the case was settled in plaintiff’s favor.

Nelson v. Bennett. L&H prosecuted and tried a class action against the promoters of a fraudulent scheme, their lawyers, tax advisors and auditors, to create tax benefits through investment in supposedly superior cows. The case was successfully tried to a jury that returned a favorable liability verdict for RICO and securities fraud violations. The final settlement in the case in 1988 brought the total of settlements for investors to more than $20 million. The United States District Judge who presided at the trial later stated it was “the most notable” civil case he handled during his ten years on the bench.

Heckman v. Ahmanson. 168 Cal. App. 3d 119, 214 Cal. Rptr. 177 (1985). L&H represented a class of investors in a case involving the “greenmailing” of the Walt Disney Corporation by investor Saul Steinberg. L&H’s client was granted a preliminary injunction that impounded the greenmail proceeds. The case was settled during jury trial in 1989 for recovery valued at more than $80 million.

Henry v. Hansen. L&H represented minority investors in their derivative suit involving a cable TV business. The allegations that corporate opportunities has been usurped by management were settled during trial in 1990. The terms of the settlements in plaintiff’s favor are confidential.

United States of America, ex rel. , Taxpayers Against Fraud, et al. v. Teledyne Industries, Inc., et al. In 1994, L&H worked with four other law firms and the United States Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles in prosecuting a False Claims Act case against Teledyne Industries for overcharges in defense contracting. The case settled just before trial in the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles for an amount in excess of $100 million.

Acree v. GMAC Corporation. L&H represented a class of purchasers of automobiles who were required to accept and pay for “force-placed” insurance in connection with their purchases. The allegations included violations of Business and Professions Code §17200 and involved deliberate overcharges for the insurance coverage. After a successful trial of equitable claims to the court and legal issues to a jury, the trial court’s judgment in favor of plaintiffs on §17200 equitable issues was overturned on appeal, but the jury verdict for substantial money damages was affirmed on a separate appeal in 2001.

Kenney v. Bear Stearns. L&H represented the trustee in bankruptcy of two corporations, Daisy Systems, Inc. and Cadnetix Corporation, in claims against the investment advisor for the merger of the two companies in a protracted matter that involved overcoming an adverse summary judgment on appeal and a jury trial in which the jury returned a verdict in plaintiff’s favor for $108 million against the investment advisor defendant. The case was settled in 2000.

Kenney v. Irell & Manella. L&H represented the trustee in bankruptcy of Daisy Systems and Cadnetix on a professional negligence claim against the law firm that advised the legal aspects of the merger. The case was settled in 2004 for $14 million, after a trial in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court on a special defense involving tolling of the statute of limitations.

NFT Ventures, Inc. In 1998, the firm represented the founder of Novell, Inc., Ray Noorda, in his family’s and other’s securities fraud claims against one of the country’s major auditing firms. Soon after filing, the case was settled in the client’s favor for a substantial sum.

Tri Valley Growers v. Deloitte & Touche. L&H represented the bankrupt entity (an agricultural cooperative) in a case against its former auditors. The case was favorably settled prior to trial for a substantial sum after extensive mediation in 2005.  The results led to significant distributions to creditors.

In re: Tri Valley Growers. L&H represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors’ in defeating grower member claims for agricultural producer liens and administrative claims in excess of $70 million.

Federal Insurance Company v. Shaw. L&H represented the bankrupt estate of Tri Valley Growers in a case involving allegations against former officers and directors, as well as the bad faith denial of insurance coverage. The case was favorably settled for a substantial sum in 2005. The results led to significant distributions to creditors.