"Panel OKs Suit Against 'Shakedown'"

Yesterday's Daily Journal reported on American Products Co. v. Law Offices of Geller, Stewart & Foley, LLP, ___ Cal.App.4th ___ (Dec. 16, 2005) (Fourth Appellate District, Division Two), handed down last Friday, in which the Court of Appeal held that the litigation privilege did not bar a suit against lawyers accused of filing Trevor-like "shakedown" suits under the former UCL. In a now-familiar irony, the lawyers were themselves sued for violating the UCL, as well as for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage.

The article incorrectly reported that "[a]fter the Trevor debacle, lawmakers changed the law so that plaintiffs now have to cite specific damages in their claims and post notice to the class." It was not lawmakers, but rather the initiative process, that resulted in the amendment.

Comments

[divorce lawyers]

The background of this case is: in 1998 A. S. W. was born. His biological father suffered a brain injury from a fall at work in 2000 and had to spend time in rehabilitation. In 2001 the juvenile office filed a petition to take jurisdiction and custody of A. S. W. because of neglect by the mother. The juvenile court decided that the father was in no condition physically or mentally to be able to take care of A. S. W. at that time. In 2002 the juvenile office petitioned to have the parental rights of both...