Park v. Law Offices of Tracey Buck-Walsh

The plaintiff sued his former lawyer for switching sides to represent his competitor in a bid to purchase an interest in a San Jose card room. But the lawsuit wasn't about attorney malpractice or gaming law, Thomas Umberg, one of the plaintiff's attorneys, said. "It's really about [the defendant] breaching her fiduciary duty and using confidential information to undermine a previous client."

According to the lawsuit and the trial, that attorney, Tracey Buck-Walsh, used the confidential information she'd learned by representing the plaintiff in previous casino deals to manipulate state gaming authorities to undermine his new deal.

"And then she covered it up," Umberg said. "The cover-up was what created the very, very large verdict." Park v. Law Offices of Tracey Buck-Walsh, SCV-259791 (Sonoma Super. Ct., filed Nov. 23, 2016).

Thomas J. Umberg

Buck-Walsh had represented plaintiff John Park's gaming business for nearly a decade until their relationship collapsed in a dispute over her fees, according to an appellate decision from late 2021 dealing with a side issue in the case. The lawsuit concerns Park's attempt to purchase a half interest in Casino M8trix in San Jose. His former counsel signed on to represent another potential purchaser for that interest.

What Umberg and co-counsel Scott Garner proved to the Sonoma County jury's satisfaction was that Buck-Walsh fed confidential information to the state deputy attorney general who represents the Bureau of Gambling Control. She told the lawyer that Park was unqualified and lacked the credentials to own a casino, and she made disparaging comments about him to the state lawyer and other regulators.

But during discovery and in the trial, she and the state lawyer denied most everything. She had deleted texts and emails from her devices. But the plaintiff's team had obtained about 50 texts between them by subpoenaing the state. "And it turned out, she not only texted, she texted frequently and in a very negative way," Garner said.

Phone records showed they also talked frequently, "and not just constantly, but at odd hours," according to Umberg.

During the trial, the plaintiff's attorneys repeatedly played portions of her deposition, denying any texting, which they juxtaposed with images of texts. And when Buck-Walsh said on the stand that she only talked with the lawyer occasionally, "we put up [records showing] a huge number... of phone calls," Umberg said.

The documentary evidence impressed the jurors. They told the plaintiff's team they considered her deletions, minimizations and misrepresentations to be egregious, he said.

The jury awarded Park more than $47 million based on the profits he did not make due to losing out on the casino deal.

In their verdict, the jurors found that the defendant acted with malice, oppression or fraud, which allowed for punitive damages. But the following day, the jury foreman reported having COVID-19, which would have delayed the trial on punitives for a week, so Park waived his right to seek them, Umberg said.

Buck-Walsh's attorneys did not respond to an email requesting they comment on the case. They have appealed.

-- Don DeBenedictis