Our trial attorneys have a winning record of defending their clients at trial. 
        






Descriptions of the recent trials we have won: 

Milton Righetti and Gloria Righetti v. Exxon Mobil Corporation and Computershare Investor Services

Alameda County Superior Court, Case No. RG-08-420315

Date of Verdict: December 21, 2009

Trial Counsel:

• Bill Armstrong and Mahsa Kashani Tippins for Exxon Mobil Corporation and Computershare Investor Services
• Matthew Righetti and Michael Righetti of the Righetti Law Firm for Plaintiffs.

Summary:

In February 1997, ExxonMobil announced a two-for-one stock split. On April 11, 1997, ExxonMobil’s transfer agent, Computershare Investor Services mailed Plaintiffs’ stock certificate to their address of record via first class mail and insured for one year. Plaintiffs were aware of the stock split and testified they expected to receive a certificate representing the newly acquired shares.

In 2006, Plaintiffs took all their stock certificates out of their safe and delivered them to Charles Schwab for transfer to a brokerage account. In 2008, Plaintiffs noticed that they were still receiving a dividend check directly for some Exxon Mobil stock, which should have been delivered to Charles Schwab instead. Believing they had transferred all their stock to Charles Schwab, Plaintiffs contacted Charles Schwab to correct the apparent error. Charles Schwab investigated and reported that it did not have the certificate for the split shares.  Based on those facts, Plaintiffs concluded they must never have received the certificate in 1997 and informed Exxon Mobil and Computershare they were not in possession of their certificate.  Before issuing a replacement certificate, Exxon Mobil requested an indemnity bond, which it is allowed to by law in order to protect the corporation and its shareholders against the risk of a bona fide purchaser. 

Plaintiffs did not want to pay the bond and during the course of litigation also criticized the mode of mailing.  Plaintiffs sued Exxon Mobil and Computershare under theories of negligence, elder abuse, unlawful business practices and conversion.  The Court granted summary adjudication on all, but the negligence, causes of action.  The parties went to trial on the negligence cause of action.

The jury deliberated for three hours and rendered a defense verdict for Exxon Mobil Corporation and Computershare Investor Services.

Nancy Morton v. Exxon Mobil Corporation

Virginia Circuit Court, Newport News, At Law No. 0180-VC

Date of Verdict: November 25, 2008


Trial Counsel:

• Bobby Hatten and the firm of Patten, Wornom, Hatten & Diamonstein for Plaintiff.
• Bill Armstrong and Denise Savoie Blocker of Armstrong & Associates, LLP and Bruce Bishop and Eric Cook of Willcox & Savage PC for Defendants Exxon Mobil Corporation and SeaRiver Maritime, Inc.

Summary:

Decedent Stanley Morton was a Newport News Shipyard employee who died of mesothelioma. His widow brought suit under the Longshore & Harbor Workers Compensation Act claiming that Exxon, as owner of merchant vessels brought in to the shipyard for repair, was responsible for the safety of the decedent, knew about the hazards of asbestos, and was therefore negligent with regard to decedent's work on defendant's ships in the 1960s and 1970s. After a two week trial, Plaintiff asked the jury for over $10 million. Defendant claimed it owed no duty to decedent, and therefore could not be negligent, because the shipyard was in control of the work performed by decedent. It was the shipyard's responsibility, not Exxon's, to protect the shipyard workers from work-related hazards, including the hazards of asbestos. Defendant also claimed that there was no evidence that decedent was actually exposed to asbestos fibers while working on any Exxon ship.

The jury deliberated for less than seven hours and rendered a defense verdict for Exxon Mobil Corporation and SeaRiver Maritime, Inc.

Donna Saller, Lori Saller, and Sheri Jocis v. Bondex International, Inc., et al.

Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 360535

Date of Verdict: December 21, 2007

Trial Counsel:

• Brent Zadorozny and Richard Arnold of Waters & Kraus Plaintiffs
• Bill Armstrong of Armstrong & Associates, LLP for Defendant Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc.
• Steve Nichols and Heather Nicoletti of Walsworth, Franklin, Bevins & McCall, LLP for Defendant Bondex International, Inc.

Summary:

Plaintiffs demanded approximately $1.8 millions from Crown Cork & Seal Company Inc. Plaintiffs alleged Decedent William Saller was exposed to asbestos-containing products while working for Standard Oil Refinery from 1959 to 1967, Los Angeles Sanitation Department from 1968 to 1972, and while performing various home remodeling jobs in the 1960s and 1970s. Plaintiffs sued many companies that allegedly made or sold asbestos-containing products to Standard Oil Refinery or manufactured joint compounds, claiming that all of the companies contributed to Mr. Saller's mesothelioma.

Crown Cork & Seal Company Inc. never manufactured or sold asbestos insulation, but was being sued because it had acquired Mundet Cork Corp. and was deemed a successor. Mundet allegedly sold asbestos insulation to Standard Oil Refinery. The evidence at trial showed that Standard Oil Refinery adhered to many safety precautions based on the scientific and industrial knowledge of the hazards of various types of asbestos at the time. However, according to Plaintiffs, Mundet should have warned the big oil company of the hazards of asbestos.

Plaintiffs also claimed Mr. Saller's work with joint compounds during home remodeling jobs in the 1960s and 1970s substantially contributed to his mesothelioma. Mr. Saller's total work with joint compounds only amounted to 12 days.

The jury deliberated for less than one day, and rendered a defense verdict for both Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc. and Bondex International, Inc.

Richard Belt v. Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc.

Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 360535

Date of Verdict: August 16, 2007

Trial Counsel:

• Jeffrey Simon & Charles Branham III of Simon Eddins & Greenstone, LLP for Plaintiff Richard Belt
• Bill Armstrong of Armstrong & Associates, LLP and Heather Blume of Morris, Polich & Purdy

Summary:

Plaintiff demanded $600,000 from Crown Cork & Seal Company Inc. Plaintiff alleged exposure to asbestos-containing products from 1950 to 1969 as a boiler tender on ships in the U.S. Navy. Plaintiff sued a number of companies that allegedly made or sold asbestos-containing products to the Navy and claims that all of those products contributed to his mesothelioma. Crown Cork & Seal Company Inc., a bottle cap and metal can producer, which never manufactured or sold asbestos insulation, was sued because it had acquired Mundet Cork Corp. and was deemed a successor to Mundet. Mundet allegedly sold asbestos insulation to the Navy; it closed its asbestos business months before the Crown acquisition, and Crown disposed of the remaining assets of that business within 90 days. Mundet also had a bottle cap business, which Crown folded into its bottle cap business.

The jury, in this retrial, deliberated for less than one day, and decided unanimously for the defense.

Barbara Harris and Dale Harris vs. Bondex International, Inc, et. al.

Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 357559

Date of Trial: March 26, 2007 through April 17, 2007

Trial Counsel:

• Chris Panatier & Saar Swartzon of Simon Eddins & Greenstone, LLP for Plaintiffs Barbara and Dale Harris
• Lisa Sapcoe & Mahsa Kashani of Armstrong & Associates for Defendant Elementis Chemicals, Inc.
• Mark Sayre and Jeff Wolfe of Jackson & Wallace Defendant Kaiser Gypsum
• Steve Nichols of Walsworth, Franklin, Bevins & McCall for Defendant Bondex International, Inc.
• Karen Agelson of Walsworth, Franklin, Bevins & McCall for Defendant Hamilton Materials, Inc.

Summary:

Plaintiffs initially demanded $3 million from Elementis. By trial, Plaintiffs' demand was reduced to $175,000. Plaintiff Barbara Harris claimed her mesothelioma was caused by exposure to asbestos-containing materials while working as a commercial building manager at various locations in southern California. Mrs. Harris' exposure allegedly took place throughout the 1960s and 1970s. The jury deliberated for less than two days and returned a defense verdict as to all defendants.

Rubin Flores vs. Bondex International, Inc, et. al.

Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 333511

Date of Trial: March 6, 2007 through April 3, 2007

Trial Counsel:

• Gary Paul & Michael Armitage of Waters & Kraus for Plaintiff Rubin Flores
• Bill Armstrong & Mahsa Kashani of Armstrong & Associates for Defendant Elementis Chemicals, Inc.
• John Brydon & Karleen Murphy for Defendant Foster Wheeler LLC
• Mark Sayre and Lorin Snyder of Jackson & Wallace Defendant Kaiser Gypsum
• Steve Nichols and Heather Nicoletti of Walsworth, Franklin, Bevins & McCall for Defendant Bondex International, Inc.
• Michael Molland Joe Duffy of Morgan Lewis for Defendant Yarway Corporation

Summary:

Plaintiff demanded $3 million from Elementis before trial. Plaintiff Ruben Flores claimed exposure to asbestos-containing materials while aboard the USS Chipola during his service in the United States Navy and to asbestos-containing joint compounds during his work as a carpenter throughout the 1960s and 1970s. Plaintiff's counsel asked the jury to award Mr. Flores over $14,000,000 and to attribute 20% of that liability to Elementis. The jury deliberated for less than one day and returned a defense verdict as to all defendants.

Richard Jones and Frances Jones v. Advocate Mines Limited, et al.

San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 447690

Date of Verdict: August 11, 2006

Trial Counsel:

• J. Bruce Jackson of Paul Hanley & Harley for Plaintiffs Frances and Richard Jones
• Bill Armstrong & Lisa Sapcoe of Armstrong & Associates for Defendant ExxonMobil Oil Corporation
• Stuart McIntosh of Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner for Defendant Thorpe Insulation

Summary:

Plaintiffs contended that Mr. Jones' work for 40 years as a pipefitter exposed him to asbestos, which led to his mesothelioma. Mr. Jones worked at the Mobil Oil refinery in Torrance, California for five months during the 1960s and claimed that his work at the refinery exposed him to asbestos-containing insulation used by other workers. Ten years of Mr. Jones' career at other jobsites was spent working with asbestos cement pipes containing crocidolite asbestos. The jury returned a defense verdict as to all defendants.