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.

Contracts
Breach of Contract
Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Kolodny & Anteau v. Ronald C. Waranch (Cross-complaint) Ronald C. Waranch v. Kolodny & Anteau, Stephen Kolodny

Published: Mar. 27, 1999 | Result Date: Dec. 8, 1998 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: BC184373 Verdict –  $90,000

Judge

Arnold H. Gold

Court

L.A. Superior Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

John W. Sheller

Jennifer K. Saunders


Experts

Plaintiff

Sorrell Trope
(technical)

Facts

On an urgent basis in early 1997 Kolodny & Anteau was retained by Ronald Waranch to represent him in his divorce/nullity case. Waranch signed a letter agreement confirming said representation but never signed or returned the more detailed retainer agreement sent to him at a later date. Waranch agreed to pay for the fees and costs incurred in said representation and never advised Kolodny & Anteau that he did not want them to perform certain services for which he was specifically billed in detailed descriptive billings. Waranch received detailed monthly statements from Kolodny & Anteau throughout the representation and continued to pay the bills through November 1997. Kolodny & Anteau had vigorously defended Ronald Waranch against a support request of more than $60,000 per month and was successful in minimizing the award to $10,000 per month, as well as obtained for Waranch exclusive use, control, and possession of Ronald Waranch's multi-million dollar house in Rancho Santa Fe and Beverly Hills. Almost immediately therafter Waranch obtained new counsel, proceeded to a court ordered settlement conference, and settled the remaining minor property issues in the case. When Kolodny & Anteau sought to recover its fee balance, Waranch decided he would seek reimbursement of the monies he had paid to them of approximately $200,000. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant based on quantum meruit.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $________. The defendant made a C.C.P. º998 offer of compromise for $ _______________.

Other Information

The verdict was reached was approximately 11 months after the case was filed. Motion for new trial brought by Kolodny & Anteau was granted as to the cross-complaint.

Deliberation

18 hours

Length

13 days


#80332

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

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