Amar

Amar v. Schuller CA2/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 24, 2014B246492California2,340 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chaney, J.

BACKGROUND

We obtain the background facts from “‘the pleadings, and supporting and opposing affidavits stating the facts upon which the liability or defense is based.’ (§ 425.16, subd. (b).)” (Navellier v. Sletten (2002) 29 Cal.4th 82, 89.) Respondent Shaoul Amar alleges Henri and Jeffrey Schuller obtained his confidential information during the course of a 20-year attorney-client relationship, and Joseph Pertel had access to the information from the Schullers. In 2011, Pertel and the Schullers represented Marc and Jacqueline Fronen in a lawsuit against Amar that alleged Amar fraudulently induced the Fronens to convey real property to him. (Fronen et al. v. Amar et al., case No. BC469858.) Amar failed to respond to the complaint, and on January 17, 2012, the trial court entered a default judgment against him. Post-judgment collection efforts are ongoing. On July 31, 2012, Amar filed suit against the Schullers, their law firm, Schuller & Schuller, and Pertel for legal malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty and intentional infliction of emotional distress, alleging defendants used his confidential information against him in the Fronen lawsuit. On October 12, 2012, Pertel moved to…

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.