Cassel

Cassel v. Superior Court

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 3d 501·179 Cal. App. 4th 152
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 12, 2009B215215California6,195 words

Opinion

Opinion

Haight Brown & Bonesteel, Peter Q. Ezzell, Nancy E. Lucas and Stephen M. Caine for Real Parties in Interest.

Petitioner Michael Cassel seeks writ relief from two orders excluding evidence in favor of real parties in interest Wasserman, Comden, Casselman & Pearson, L.L.P., David B. Casselman and Steve K. Wasserman. We grant the petition to vacate the orders with directions.

In 2005, petitioner Michael Cassel (Cassel) filed a legal malpractice action against his former attorneys, real parties in interest Wasserman, Comden, Casselman & Pearson, L.L.P., David B. Casselman (Casselman) and Steve K. Wasserman (collectively Wasserman Comden). Wasserman Comden represented Cassel in a lawsuit regarding ownership interest in Von Dutch Originals, LLC, a famous clothing company, and a license to use the Von Dutch name (Von Dutch lawsuit). [1] Cassel and Wasserman Comden met with each other on August 2, 3 and 4, 2004, with respect to the Von Dutch lawsuit. Cassel (directly and through Wasserman Comden) and the opposing party (directly and through his counsel) participated in a mediation on August 4 as a result of which Cassel and the opposing party entered into a $1.25 million…

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.