Contact Us

Use the form on the right to contact us.

You can edit the text in this area, and change where the contact form on the right submits to, by entering edit mode using the modes on the bottom right. 

1011 Camino Del Rio S, Suite 531
San Diego, CA, 92108
United States

(619) 236-8655

Representation in business, real estate, construction, home care, trust and probate litigation and general civil litigation.

Blog

Bank of America Begins New Principal Reduction Program

Ron Stormoen

On February 8, 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice, along with the States’ Attorney’s General announced that they had entered into a $26 billion settlement with the U.S.’s five biggest banks, including Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and Ally Financial.
After hearing this announcement, and in the last few months, many homeowners are probably wondering why they haven’t seen any of this money.

The good news is that on May 8, 2012, Bank of America announced that it has began reaching out to customers who may be eligible for forgiveness of a portion of the principal balance of their mortgage under the terms of the February 8 settlement.

Read More

Punitive Damages

Ron Stormoen

Punitive Damages: How Much Can I Get—Or How Much Can Plaintiff Get Against Me?

Individuals and companies contemplating litigation often ask about the possibility of recovering punitive damages against a defendant. We all read articles about the “millions and millions” recovered in certain cases. Punitive damages are fundamentally punishment damages, essentially an amount of money a defendant may be required to pay to a plaintiff, which does not relate to a plaintiff’s damage or injury but as a punishment, or deterrent, for certain bad acts by the defendant. The following article provides the reader with some general guidance regarding such damage awards.

Read More

Employer's Duty Regarding Breaks

Ron Stormoen

MEAL AND REST PERIODS FOR NONEXEMPT EMPLOYEES

Our small and medium size business clients often have questions relating to their employment practices. When relevant California or Federal laws change or are clarified, we want our clients to be informed.

A recent California case brought some clarity in the areas of meal and rest periods. (Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court L 1216356, 14 -24 (Cal., 2012).

SUMMARY PRACTICE POINTS:

1. Bona fide relief from duty and the relinquishing of control satisfies the employer's meal break obligations, and work by a relieved employee during a meal break does not thereby place the employer in violation of its obligations and create liability for premium pay under applicable law. In other words, the employer is not obligated to police meal breaks and ensure no work thereafter is performed. Of course, an employer may not undermine a formal policy of providing meal breaks by pressuring employees to perform their duties in ways that omit breaks.

Read More

Overview of Trademark Law

Ron Stormoen

Over the years we have handled various trademark issues and, therefore, thought it might be helpful to share some trademark fundamentals.

1. What is a trademark?

A trademark is a word, symbol, or phrase, used to identify a particular manufacturer or seller's products and distinguish them from the products of another. (15 U.S.C. section 1127). For example, the trademark "Nike," along with the Nike "swoosh," identify the shoes made by Nike and distinguish them from shoes made by other companies (e.g. Reebok or Adidas). Similarly, the trademark "Coca-Cola" distinguishes the brown-colored soda water of one particular manufacturer from the brown-colored soda of another (e.g. Pepsi). When such marks are used to identify services (e.g. "Jiffy Lube") rather than products, they are called service marks, although they are generally treated just the same as trademarks.

Read More

Possession of The Original Note is Not Necessary to Conduct a Valid Foreclosure Sale

Ron Stormoen

It has been a popular tactic across the country, with all the foreclosures of trust deeds, which have been assigned multiple times, for borrowers and/or junior lien holders to try and thwart a non-judicial foreclosure sale by claiming that “no foreclosure of a deed of trust is valid unless the beneficiary is in possession of the original underlying promissory note.” Any assignees of the original note and deed of trust do not possess the original note. Without such possession, some argue, the deed of trust is allegedly “severed” from the promissory note and consequently is of no effect. Some have also tried to rely on the Commercial Code claiming that because a promissory note is a negotiable instrument, it can only be assigned with a valid endorsement and physical delivery to the assignee; again, the foreclosing party allegedly needs the original note.

Read More