Facts

Defendants represented plaintiff in her dissolution from her screenwriter husband. Defendants allegedly failed to obtain an appropriate division of property and reimbursements.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff claimed that defendants failed to obtain proper credits for community expenditures; failed to properly value screenplays; failed to secure appropriate rights; caused plaintiff to owe more debts and reimbursements; failed to obtain spousal support award; failed to properly divide, account for and characterize property, including the couple's corporation that marketed scripts, with the net result that husband ended up with close to $300,000 more than plaintiff, as well as all of the creative properties (scripts and other writings). Plaintiff was attempting to produce two additional films, which did not happen because defendants failed to secure her rights. She lost the ability to produce a film to which Donald Sutherland had committed, and lost the ability to move forward on another solid project. She lost momentum in the industry and due to her age and had not been able to return to her level of production work. She ended up owning a fair trade boutique and continuing her career as a producer with her own production company.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants claimed that plaintiff's damages were wholly speculative. She received the legally appropriate division and characterization in the divorce action. Defendants claimed that plaintiff's husband got "more" cash because plaintiff had run up credit card bills and continued living in the family home.

Settlement Discussions

Defendants offered $35,001 pursuant to CCP 998 at mediation.

Damages

Loss of spousal support; excess charges for credit card; assessed charges for use of community residence; loss of producer fees; failure to put on evidence at trial. Plaintiff's damages based on court's orders in dissolution action totaled $248,500 plus interest; other damages claimed were $150,000 producer fees and $3.5 million for scripts.

Result

Verdict for plaintiff in the amount of $323,731. Non-Suit as to Defendant Soo Kim. The jury found defendants Suzanne Harris and Harris-Ginsberg negligent by a vote of 9-3.

Other Information

Plaintiff was in pro per until six weeks before trial. FILING DATE: May 13, 2009.

Deliberation

one day

Length

two weeks