In the 1980s blockbuster film, Wargames, we learned that no one "wins" a nuclear war. The lesson never translated to the world of litigation where far too many lawyers still believe that to convey toughness, every conflict needs to "go nuclear." But smart tacticians know there is more to winning than simply the opposition's losing.
Our vision for successful litigation is different. We believe in the end-game strategy, one that evaluates costs and benefits, where winning is determined by our success, not just mutually assured destruction.
You can't get to your end-game without a few skirmishes.
We fight in the courts. We fight in arbitration. We fight before the administrative agencies. Sometimes a lawsuit has to go to trial in order to get resolved. We do that too.
Sometimes you have to compel the opposition's response to discovery. But before you can move to compel, you are required to "meet and confer." If you do the "meet and confer" wrong, your discovery motion will be doomed.
A common area of abuse occurs when attorneys instruct their clients to not answer a deposition question. Instructions to refuse to answer should occur only in response to questions implicating a privilege. All other instructions to not answer questions for relevance, for hearsay, or even for “harassment,” are improper.
The firm is pleased to report that in a hard fought matter spanning eight years, after a trial, and after four years on appeal, the California Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Tong Robbins’ clients, holding, in plain language, “We agree with plaintiffs.”
Initial consultations are always free of charge.
Whether we engage as your lawyers or not, we always keep your
communications privileged and confidential.