May 8, 2013

SANTA BARBARA, CALIF.– Leila J. Noël, partner with the Santa Barbara law firm of Cappello & Noël LLP, was named one of the “Top 100 Women Lawyers” in California by the Los Angeles and San Francisco Daily Journals. Noël was the only attorney selected for the list between the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles.

The list of attorneys appeared in the May 8, 2013 issue of the Daily Journal, California’s largest legal daily newspaper. In an editor’s note, the paper says it carefully reviewed nominations of the most prominent women attorneys in the state, before selecting attorneys whose work “is having a broad impact on the legal community, the nation and society.”

“There are nearly 75,000 women practicing law in California. Out of the 100 that were acknowledged, nearly all practice in large law firms in the Los Angeles and San Francisco areas,” says A. Barry Cappello, Noël’s legal partner. “Leila consistently produces impressive outcomes for her clients, whether they are from Santa Barbara County or throughout the state or nation. Our firm is proud that Leila’s efforts have been recognized.”

Although her practice primarily focuses on complex business litigation and lender liability, the Daily Journal highlighted her recent work in a wrongful death and catastrophic personal injury suit (Jose A. Arredondo, et al. vs. Santa Barbara County Sherriff’s Dept., et al.). The case involved a claim of negligence against the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department in connection with a wrong-way driver. The case settled prior to trial with the County paying $4.8 million to the family.

“Individuals and businesses, no matter the complexity of their situation, can be assured that they will receive the best legal representation with Leila on their side. Our firm is honored to have an attorney of Leila’s caliber and talent on our team,” says Cappello.

Each year, a research team at Super Lawyers undertakes an independent, statewide survey of lawyers, compiles peer reviews and makes good-standing and disciplinary checks of thousands of attorneys. Only attorneys receiving the highest marks qualify as a Super Lawyer. Super Lawyers recognized Cappello and Noël for their legal success in business litigation.

Cappello, who has been named a Super Lawyer since 2007, and Noël, a Super Lawyer for two years, represent plaintiffs in lender liability matters, complex business litigation, class actions and catastrophic personal injury cases. They often co-try the firm’s largest cases, and have obtained jury verdicts and negotiated settlements in excess of $1 billion on behalf of their clients.

In 2011, Noël was named one of the “Top 75 Women Litigators” in California by the Los Angeles and San Francisco Daily Journals. Since 2007, the National Trial Lawyers Association has listed Cappello as a “Top 100 Trial Attorney” in California and he has been named to the “Best Lawyers in America” since 1994.

In the early hours of November 8, 2009, Jose Arredondo was driving on the southbound U.S. 101 near Goleta. Plaintiff Marina Murillo was with him in the vehicle. Arredondo was followed by his and Murillo’s 18-year-old son, Marcos Arredondo, who was driving a 2000 Honda Accord. Marcos’ sisters, Yessica and Karina Arredondo, were riding in the backseat and another individual was riding in the passenger seat. An intoxicated driver, Richard Rodriguez, entered the 101 freeway south of the Arredondos and began driving the wrong way (north) on the southbound 101.

Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Deputy Jeremy Rodgers was in the vicinity and responded to a report of a wrong way driver. “Sheriff’s deputies are not trained to respond to wrong way drivers on the freeway. It’s the CHP’s jurisdiction and responsibility,” says A. Barry Cappello, managing partner of the Santa Barbara law firm Cappello & Noël and one of the lawyers who represented the Arredondo family. “The sheriff’s actions were in violation of department policy and his negligent actions resulted in this tragedy.”

According to the lawsuit filed against the county and sheriff’s department, Rodgers entered the 101 and merged very slowly into the number two (slow) lane directly in front of the Arredondos. Rodgers failed to signal or to put on his overhead flashing lights or siren signaling there was an emergency. Jose Arredondo was forced to quickly change lanes to the number one (fast) lane to avoid colliding with Rodgers. This put Arredondo directly in the path of Rodriguez’ oncoming wrong way vehicle. Marcos Arredondo followed his father’s vehicle into the number one lane.

“After the Arredondo vehicles passed Rogers, he finally turned on his flashing lights and siren.  Jose assumed he was being pulled over,” says Cappello. “He moved over to lane two just as Rodriguez’ car zoomed by, barely missing him. Rodriguez then slammed head on into the vehicle driven by Marcos. Marcos died of his injuries as did the individual in the passenger seat. Yessica and Karina Arredondo, who were minors at the time, sustained brain, spinal cord, pelvic and other injuries that will last a lifetime. Their parents witnessed it all.”

“By his actions, Rodgers turned a hazardous condition into a deadly one,” says Leila J. Noël, who represented the plaintiffs with Cappello. “He became a danger by pulling in front of the Arredondos at an extremely slow speed and not using his signals, siren or flashing lights. He literally forced the Arredondos into the path of the wrong-way driver. Numerous other vehicles in the number two lane safely passed Rodriguez; if Rodgers had not operated his vehicle in a negligent manner, the accident would not have occurred.”

The vast majority of the settlement money

The mission of the Legal Aid Foundation is to provide high-quality legal services so that low-income persons and seniors have access to the civil justice system in times of crisis. It also offers secure safe, habitable shelter, adequate income and protection from domestic violence and elder abuse.

“Cappello & Noël has provided unwavering support to Legal Aid over the years,” says Ellen Goodstein, the foundation’s executive director. “It’s this kind of backing that enables Legal Aid to make a positive impact in the lives of many in our community.”

Cappello & Noël has contributed over $75,000 to the foundation and also donated a state-of-the-art telephone system. Noël is a Legal Aid Foundation board member. “Our firm wants to do what it can to ensure that the work of this wonderful organization continues,” says Noël.

The jury decided unanimously in favor of USSD on almost every cause of action against Z-Ultimate companies and its owners (former USSD executives) Paul Taylor, Kris Eszlinger, Hans Prosch, Frank Ley, William Clark and Russell Clegg. The charges included breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, misappropriation of trade secrets and confidential information, Penal Code 502 (destroying computer records), trademark infringement and civil conspiracy. In addition, it found against Mike Hatleberg, manager of Z-Ultimate Martial Arts Supplies, LLC, for misappropriation of trade secrets and found against the owners of Z-Ultimate companies for malice and fraud.

“Z-Ultimate started this long legal battle in 2010 when its owners sued USSD as they attempted to unlawfully take over USSD schools,” says A. Barry Cappello, managing partner of the Santa Barbara law firm Cappello & Noël, LLP and the lead attorney representing USSD.

Each of the defendants were trained and mentored by Charles Mattera, 10th degree black belt and USSD’s founder, and eventually each ran numerous USSD schools. “Because of their breach of fiduciary duties and a collective conspiracy against USSD, they were able to illegally seize control and convert over 80 USSD locations,” explains Cappello.

USSD proved at trial that the defendants, during and after the takeover attempt, misappropriated USSD’s trade secrets including the Shaolin Kempo-style training system exclusively owned by USSD. They also took confidential corporate financial records and other confidential business materials. Defendants were found to have infringed the USSD logos and trademark.

In September 2010, the defendants announced in letters to investors and students that “select USSD locations will be joining the professional ranks of Z-Ultimate Self Defense Studios.” “Their tactics misled students and investors into believing that USSD was still involved,” says Lawrence J. Conlan, USSD co-counsel with Cappello. “The defendants arrogantly believed that it would be okay to change the names of the USSD studios overnight and use USSD trade secrets and trademarks without suffering the legal consequences.”

“We are very happy with the jury’s decision,” says Mattera. “We thank USSD investors, instructors and, most of all, our students who have remained loyal to United Studios of Self Defense over these past two years.”

For more information on USSD, visit USSD’s website at http://www.ussd.com.

Attorneys A. Barry Cappello and Leila J. Noël, partners in the Santa Barbara law firm of Cappello & Noël, LLP, brought the class action lawsuit on behalf of minority borrowers, alleging that Wells Fargo consistently and knowingly discriminated against borrowers in minority neighborhoods resulting in these borrowers paying more for their loans than borrowers in non-minority areas of Los Angeles County. The jury found that the race, color, ancestry and/or national origin of the plaintiffs were a “motivating reason” for Wells Fargo’s conduct.

“The Justice Department announced today that Wells Fargo will pay $175 million to settle a lending discrimination lawsuit against Wells Fargo,” says Cappello. “The government recognized what was apparent for years in the Los Angeles area. It had only to look at the Jones case to see the pattern of deliberate discrimination.”

The suit was filed under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which bars discrimination by businesses. Judge Anthony Mohr, who presided over the trial, noted that, as far as anyone knows, the case was the first Unruh Act class action to go through a full trial to verdict.

In 2002, Wells Fargo introduced a computer program called “Loan Economics,” which gave loan officers the ability to offer loan applicants lower pricing through reduced interest rates and points. The class action alleged that loan officers in predominately non-minority bank branches could use the program to price loans, while loan officers in predominantly minority bank branches could not. The evidence presented at trial was that Wells Fargo management prevented the branches in minority neighborhoods from using the program.

Under the plan of distribution preliminarily approved by the Court, each class member is expected to receive about $400. Named class plaintiff Opal Jones is satisfied that Wells Fargo has been called out for its discriminatory practices. “I trusted Wells Fargo to give me and others like me the best possible loan,” says Jones. “But borrowers who tried to obtain loans at branches in minority communities were not offered the bank’s best loans. Instead, they paid higher loan costs than borrowers in non-minority neighborhoods. That’s unfair. I’m happy that we had our day in court and, hopefully, Wells Fargo will learn from this.”

Plaintiffs’ attorneys litigated the case for over six years, and the trial lasted three months. They asked for their fees incurred in the case, approximately $12 million, as well as a small multiplier due to the risk involved in representing the borrower class. Wells Fargo suggested that $2.3 million in attorneys’ fees would be an appropriate award. The judge disagreed with both sides.

The mission of the Legal Aid Foundation of Santa Barbara County is to provide high-quality legal services in order to ensure that low-income persons and seniors have access to the civil justice system in times of crisis and to secure safe, habitable shelter, adequate income and protection from domestic violence and elder abuse.

Noël and her firm have long been supporters of the Legal Aid Foundation. “We know that in order to fulfill its mission, the Legal Aid Foundation requires substantial funding from outside sources, and we are happy to be part of that,” said Noël. “By joining the board of directors, I hope to be able to further promote the necessary work of this wonderful organization.”

Noël represents plaintiffs in lender liability matters, complex business litigation, class actions and catastrophic personal injury cases. Noël has co-tried most of the firm’s largest cases, and has obtained jury verdicts and settlements in excess of $200 million on behalf of her clients. In 2011, she was named one of the “Top 75 Women Litigators” in California by the Los Angeles and San Francisco Daily Journals, and a Southern California Super Lawyer in 2012.

Joel Berman, Attorney, Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell (moderator)

Elizabeth Khachigian, Senior Vice President and Assistant General Counsel, Comerica Bank

Thomas Robins, Chief Supervising Trial Attorney, Frandzel Robins Bloom Csato

Seth Moldoff, SVP Division Manager Credit Resolution Group, Wells Fargo

For more information on the conference go to SAMA Conference.

“Moelleken had plenty of opportunity to show he could be a reliable panel member,” says A. Barry Cappello, managing partner of the Santa Barbara law firm of Cappello & Noël who represented the four on-call emergency room neurosurgeons (Dr. Thomas Jones, Dr. Scott Conner, Dr. Richard Chung and Dr. Alois Zauner with Santa Barbara Neurosurgery Associates). “He was given a chance to serve on the panel in 2000 but proved unreliable. Two independent panels of doctors convened by the hospital came to the conclusion that he should not be added.”

Representing Cottage Hospital during trial was Jeffrey LeVee, partner with the Los Angeles office of Jones Day. Evidence and testimony were presented by Cappello and LeVee that showed Moelleken was not harmed financially by Cottage Hospital’s decision, with Moelleken making about $11 million a year from his orthopedic clinics and a surgical center. “Moelleken makes more than the surgeons he was suing,” says Cappello. “The jury didn’t buy that he suffered financially. This was a case of someone who tried to use the legal system to bully others when he didn’t get his way.”

Cappello sees this case as having an impact on hospitals throughout the country. “If Moelleken had won,” says Cappello, “a doctor could sue every time a hospital makes a decision that benefits a patient but doesn’t financially benefit the doctor. The decision on who should be included on a hospital emergency call panel should be made by doctors independent of the hospital, as was in this case, with patient health as the deciding factor. A doctor’s ego or greed should not play a role.”

The jury voted nine to three to reject the claim that Cottage Hospital had engaged in anti-trust conspiratory behavior injurious to Moelleken. The jury also voted to reject the claims against the four surgeons by the same or greater numbers.