Rick Richmond

Rick Richmond, a partner at Larson LLP, has more than 35 years of experience and a reputation for handling complex, high-stakes litigation. His ability to navigate difficult cases has earned him two California Lawyer Attorney of the Year (CLAY) Awards.

Currently, he’s lead defense counsel for Haresh Jogani, a real estate business owner embroiled in a dispute with his brothers over ownership of Southern California real estate. Shashikant Jogani, et al. v. Haresh Jogani, et al., BC290553 (L.A. Sup. Ct., filed Feb. 18, 2003).

Filed in 2003, this long-standing case is one of the oldest civil cases in Los Angeles County and involves $5 billion in assets. The trial has attracted media attention and is expected to be a pivotal litigation in California for 2023-24.

“The trial is destined to be the longest Los Angeles trial in 2023-2024, having started in September 2023 and is expected to end in late January 2024,” Richmond said. “Due to the anticipated length of the trial, the court called in an initial jury pool of 400 potential jurors, from which it ultimately selected 12 jurors and 12 alternates.”

The outcome of the trial, irrespective of which side prevails, is expected to be challenged in appeals, signifying its importance in shaping future legal proceedings, he said.

Throughout the trial, Richmond has faced the challenge of maintaining the jury’s engagement over an extended period.

“Dozens of witnesses, hundreds of exhibits, evidence of complicated business transactions around the world and translations from English to Gujarati back to English, make this a difficult task,” he said. “The closing arguments in a case of this length and complexity will be critical in helping the jury understand — and remember — what has happened during the course of the trial.”

Looking ahead to the future, Richmond said the potential impact of AI and chatbots like ChatGPT on legal analysis, briefing and argument is a significant issue that will need to be addressed by educators, litigators, judges and other lawyers in the profession.

“Critical legal thinking has always been at the heart of traditional legal education and legal practice. With the advent of AI, however, students and new lawyers may be tempted to rely on artificial intelligence to create first drafts of briefs and arguments for the sake of efficiency,” he said. “However, in the process, those gains in efficiency may result in eventual losses in the ability of developing lawyers to think critically on their own, especially when creativity, nuance and sophisticated judgment are required.”