Kerr & Wagstaffe LLP

Complex Litigation

San Francisco

Kerr & Wagstaffe LLP has secured victories in a number of high-profile cases while often facing off against attorneys from much larger firms.

Partner James M. Wagstaffe, a co-founder, said his team is made up of lawyers who are just as talented as those from the big law world and are fearless.

“Sometimes we get underestimated,” he said. “That helps us.”

Having 14 attorneys also allows the firm to be very nimble.

“We do not have to turn slowly like a battleship,” Wagstaffe said.

His team represented the former general counsel of Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., who secured a $14.6 million judgment in a federal whistleblower lawsuit earlier this year.

The judgment, which included $5 million in punitive damages as well as attorney’s fees, was the largest ever under the Dodd-Frank Act. Wadler v. Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., 15-cv02356 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 6, 2017).

Bio-Rad was represented by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP and Latham & Watkins LLP.

Kerr & Wagstaffe used metadata to show that a negative review of the plaintiff the company said was completed shortly before Sanford Wadler’s firing was prepared at least a month after he was terminated.

“One of the great things about having so many younger lawyers is they are all on top of technological world,” Wagstaffe said.

The firm has also made a name for itself successfully defending government agencies, including those with a legal focus.

The state Supreme Court ruled unanimously in 2013 that the State Bar should disclose demographic and academic information about bar applicants requested by a law professor if the data could be provided in a way that protected individual applicants’ privacy.

Kerr & Wagstaffe lawyers were able to win a subsequent trial court victory for the bar last year in the long-running case brought by UCLA School of Law Professor Richard Sander. Sander v. State Bar of California, CPF08508880 (S.F. Super. Ct. Nov. 7, 2016). The case is on appeal.

The firm is representing the Commission on Judicial Performance in a face-off with the state auditor. The CJP is seeking to prevent the auditor from accessing judicial discipline records it argues are confidential. Commission on Judicial Performance v. Howle, CPF515308 (S.F. Super. Ct., filed Oct. 20, 2016).

Another government client is the state Board of Equalization, which handles tax disputes.

Partner Michael von Loewenfeldt said the firm has done well representing public sector clients because it understands the public policies involved and remembers that the agencies often have interests that go beyond the facts of an individual case.

“We also can bring to the table our experience from private litigation and the fresh perspective that brings,” he said.

Kerr & Wagstaffe has achieved successes at the appellate level as well.

The 1st District Court of Appeal reversed the dismissal of a lawsuit by firm client, ZL Technologies Inc. for defamation against several persons who were accused of posting false and defamatory anonymous “reviews” on Glassdoor Inc.’s employment database. The court concluded that all but one of the reviews contained defamatory statements, and it clarified the standard of proof that must be met to receive in discovery the identity of anonymous internet posers who engage in defamation. ZL Technologies, Inc. v. Does 1-7, A143680 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. July 19, 2017).

Von Loewenfeldt, a certified appellate specialist, said the firm realizes the most important appellate work takes place before oral argument, and it aims to produce very clear writing.

“Particularly at the appellate level,” he said, “we crisply describe what the facts are and why they matter.”

— Lyle Moran