Michael McNamara

Michael McNamara has been at the forefront of complex and high-stakes litigation, showcasing his experience in navigating intricate legal challenges and securing significant victories for his clients.

Among his major accomplishments are two noteworthy cases: Goldberg v. Halloran & Sage LLP et al., related to the Woodbridge Litigation, and Michael Sanchez v. Lauren Sanchez et al.

In the Woodbridge Litigation, McNamara achieved success by resolving claims against the law firm Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP, which was implicated in a Ponzi scheme operated by the Woodbridge Group of Companies, leading to more than $1.3 billion in investor losses.

The case was a “bet-your-firm” situation due to the enormous potential liability exceeding insurance coverage. McNamara’s strategic use of an anti-SLAPP motion led to the dismissal of most claims against his client and significantly reduced the risk of catastrophic liability. The eventual settlement, based solely on insurance proceeds, safeguarded the client from any further financial exposure.

“In the Woodbridge Litigation, the biggest challenge was based on the huge amount of potential damages at issue, if we did not prevail on the last remaining part of the case, which was not dismissed based on the anti-SLAPP motion,” McNamara said. “While we felt confident that we could win the case on the merits, we could not ignore a scenario where there would not be enough insurance to cover catastrophic damages. By winning a dismissal of 90% of the claims in our initial anti-SLAPP motion, we were able to effectively posture the case for a settlement on the eve of the oral argument in the Court of Appeal for an amount well within the available policy limits, so that the amount paid by our client for a dismissal ‘with prejudice’ was zero.”

In the second case involving Michael Sanchez’s lawsuit against his sister Lauren Sanchez and her lawyers, McNamara defended the law firm Bird Marella and partner Terry W. Bird against claims of civil extortion and emotional distress. The lawsuit was connected to the high-profile affair between Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez. McNamara successfully won an anti-SLAPP motion, leading to the dismissal of the lawsuit and an award of $198,000 in attorneys’ fees. The victory in this case was significant in protecting legal professionals from baseless allegations and leveraging the anti-SLAPP statute to counter claims involving protected activities.

“We had to overcome extremely broad and conclusory allegations by the plaintiff, which is always difficult to do in an anti-SLAPP motion, which is resolved before there is any formal discovery,” McNamara said.

He noted these cases highlight the growing trend of trustees or receivers unfairly targeting law firms in Ponzi scheme cases, often using “aiding and abetting” theories of liability. McNamara notes the increasing frequency of such cases and the challenges they pose, particularly when law firms are unwittingly implicated in their clients’ criminal activities. Furthermore, McNamara emphasizes the effective use of California’s anti-SLAPP statute in defending against non-meritorious claims against law firms, demonstrating its crucial role in safeguarding the legal profession from unfounded litigation.