Mitsue Takahashi v. Carolyn Phillips
Published: Nov. 9, 1996 | Result Date: Sep. 20, 1996 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 5078514 – $0
Judge
Court
Fresno Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Karen M. Goodman
(Goodman & Associates)
Experts
Plaintiff
Gregory Windheim
(technical)
Martin M. Horowitz
(technical)
Defendant
Carolyn Langford
(technical)
Theodore R. Forest
(technical)
Facts
In November 1990, plaintiff Mitsue Takahashi, a 67-year-old former school teacher, brought an employment discrimination against Farmers Insurance, her employer. She represented herself until August 1991, when she retained defendant Carolyn Phillips, a civil rights attorney, to represent her in the action. During the attorney-client relationship, defendant Phillips discovered that the plaintiff's version of events of what occurred at Farmers could not be corroborated. Moreover, defendant Phillips learned that plaintiff suffered from a paranoid personality disorder and refused to set aside her numerous other lawsuits, including litigation against the Livingston School Board, her former employer, and prior lawyers, and focus upon the lawsuit against Farmers. As such, defendant Phillips claimed she could no longer provide adequate advice or counseling for the plaintiff. The plaintiff would not consider a settlement in spite of defendant Phillips evaluation that she would not prevail. The defendants claimed the plaintiff's conduct while an employee at Farmers continued to deteriorated. In February 1993, Farmers terminated the plaintiff. The plaintiff's relationship with defendant Phillips became increasingly adversarial and accusatory. In March 1993, defendant Phillips requested that plaintiff retain another attorney. The plaintiff refused to allow the defendants to substitute out of the case. In April 1993, the defendants filed a motion requesting a court order permitting their withdrawal from the case. The Merced County Superior Court granted the motion on the grounds there was a completed breakdown of the attorney-client relationship. As a result, defendant Phillips was relieved from serving the plaintiff's attorney. The plaintiff subsequently secured several additional attorneys who prosecuted the case against Farmers on her behalf. After the plaintiff put on her evidence, the court granted a nonsuit in favor of Farmers. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant attorney and her firm based on breach of fiduciaty duty and _____________ theories of recovery.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $200,000. The defendant made a C.C.P. º998 offer of compromise for $25,000, which was raised to $35,000 before trial.
Damages
The plaintiff sought compensatory damages for $25,000 paid to the defendants; $100,000 paid to subsequent attorney; $30,000 imposed as a judgment for costs against plaintiff in favor of Farmers; and approximately $3,000 to $5,000 in costs paid to Merced County Court for jury fees and court reported fees.
Other Information
The verdict was reached approximately ____ years and ____ months after the case was filed. A settlement conference/arbitration/mediation was held on ___/___/1996 before ________________ (name) of ____________ (affiliation or court) resulting in ___________ . Per the defendants, the jury found that the plaintiff was not credible and had misrepresented the value and quality of her case to defendant Phillips, and that defendant Phillips had reasonably performed under the terms of her retainer agreement with the plaintiff. EXPERT TESTIMONY: Defense expert Carol Langford testified that defendant Phillips was ethically obligated to withdraw due to the disingtegration of the attorney-client relationship. Langford as an Ethics professor whose practices concentrates on the ethicalissues confronting attorneys. She is also chairperson for the State Bar Committee on Ethics. Defense expert Theodore Forest, the trial attorney for Farmers, testified that defendant Phillips' conduct met the standard of care; that in his opinion, the plaintiff's case was not meritorious; and that he did not believe that any of the plaintiff's subsequently incurred expenses were caused by defendant Phillips' withdrawal.
Deliberation
1+ hours
Poll
not available
Length
10 days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390