Nissim Lanyadoo v. David Gellman, Goldstein, Gellman, Melbostad, Harris & McSparran, LLP, and Does 1 through 10 / Goldstein, Gellman, Melbostad, Harris & McSparran, LLP v. Nissim Lanyadoo, and Does 1 through 20
Published: Apr. 16, 2016 | Result Date: Mar. 14, 2016 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: CGC-13-532139 Summary Judgment – Defense
Court
San Francisco Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Basil N. Plastiras Jr.
(Plastiras & Terrizzi)
Defendant
Kyle Phillipe Montes De Oca
(RH Montes De Oca APC)
Facts
Nassim Lanyadoo sued David Gellman and Goldstein, Gellman, Melbostad, Harris & McSparran LLP, for alleged legal malpractice. Goldstein Gellman filed a cross-complaint against Lanyadoo.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants allegedly began representing plaintiff from June 6, 2006, including in the underlying matter (Singha v. Lanyadoo) and the creation of a loan between the parties. Defendants were allegedly negligent in representing plaintiff in those matters.
DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants denied the allegations and asserted various affirmative defenses. Defendants also moved for summary judgment.
Result
Goldstein Gellman's summary judgment motion being unopposed, the court granted the motion. The order, however, does not affect Goldstein Gellman's cross-complaint against Lanyadoo.
Other Information
FILING DATE: June 14, 2013.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390