Mejia

Mejia v. Mares CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 6, 2025E083652California2,093 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

I. Allegations of the complaint

Mejia filed his complaint in October 2023, representing himself. He alleged a

single cause of action for legal malpractice against Dawn Elaine Shipley, Theresa

DeVries, Johanna Mares, Kellen Dugan, Bryan Fazio, Michael Burns, and Burns and

Oblachinski, A Professional Corporation dba Juvenile Defense Panel.

According to the complaint and exhibits attached to it, Mejia’s children were the

subject of a dependency case that started in July 2023. The juvenile court appointed

DeVries to represent the children and Shipley to represent Mejia. Mejia tried to file

documents before the July 2023 initial hearing on the dependency petition. The superior

court clerk refused to accept the documents because Mejia was represented by counsel.

We refer to the Burns and Oblachinski firm as Juvenile Defense Panel. In September 2024, we granted Heidi Burns’s motion to substitute herself for Michael Burns as his successor in interest. 2 Mejia left the documents with Juvenile Defense Panel, which refused to file them. On

the day of the initial hearing, Shipley allegedly was “belittling” when she met with Mejia.

He requested new counsel at…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.