This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

May 18, 2022

Lisa J. Perrochet

See more on Lisa J. Perrochet

Horvitz & Levy LLP

Lisa J. Perrochet joined Horvitz & Levy LLP straight out of law school and for 35 years has represented clients in hundreds of appeals and writ proceedings. Her most recent win at the state Supreme Court in March 2022 extends a string of victories in her battle against abuse of California's lemon law regarding defective vehicles.

She is a member of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers

Representing an auto manufacturer in a product liability suit, she and law partner Frederic D. Cohen persuaded the high court to resolve favorably to her client a split among Courts of Appeal over an exception to the hearsay rule. The justices ruled inadmissible hearsay testimony from prior depositions given in different lawsuits years earlier by now-unavailable witnesses in other states. A trial judge had excluded the testimony only to be reversed by a Court of Appeal panel. At issue was whether Perrochet's client had the right to cross-examine the declarants. Berroteran v. Superior Court (Ford Motor Co.) S272618 (Ca. S. Ct., op. filed March 7, 2022).

The unanimous opinion was written by Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye. "This has been a recurring issue, so getting an answer is great for our case and even more important on a docket-wide basis," Perrochet said.

Perrochet also successfully argued in a different lemon law case that a state appellate panel should reverse a significant attorney fees and costs award. The outcome will largely, if not completely, eliminate the client's monetary exposure of more than $200,000. Covert v. FCA USA LLC, (2d DCA, op. filed Jan. 24, 2022).

The defendant offered to pay the plaintiff $51,000, plus reasonable fees and costs to settle and later upped the offer to $145,000. The offers were rejected; a jury awarded $48,000. The Court of Appeal panel held the plaintiff's objections to the offer were meritless.

"The Legislature has tried to advance the ability of parties to settle these cases," Perrochet said.

The case is one of more than a dozen appeals in which auto manufacturer clients have retained Perrochet to defend against an onslaught of fee-driven lemon law cases that have overwhelmed state trial courts in recent years, she said. The opinion will influence many of them in defendants' favor by reinforcing the public policy in favor of early resolution by removing the incentive for plaintiffs' counsel to turn down robust settlement offers and then obtain a smaller payout for their clients while seeking fee awards that dwarf the clients' recovery.

"This opinion should return the whole docket to a more normal pace," Perrochet said.

- John Roemer

#367574

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com