Danko

Danko v. O'Reilly

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 18, 2014A138784California7,468 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richman, J.

BACKGROUND

From 1995 to 2009, plaintiff Michael Danko practiced law with defendant Terry O’Reilly, primarily in the firm of O’Reilly & Collins. The professional parting of Danko and O’Reilly was not amicable. In December 2009, Danko filed a complaint for damages against O’Reilly, as an individual, and O’Reilly & Collins. Among the causes of action alleged by Danko were: (1) breach of an oral contract of compensation; (2) quantum meruit; (3) indemnification of expenses; (4) discharge in violation of public policy; and (5) the statutory Labor Code penalty for willful failure to pay wages.1 Jury selection was completed and the actual trial commenced on June 13, 2012. After the court granted the motion of O’Reilly, the individual, for a directed verdict in his favor, the case was sent to the jury on July 2. The jury returned its special verdict the next day. As to Danko’s cause of action for breach of contract, the jury answered “yes” to these questions: “(1) Did Michael Danko and O’Reilly & Collins enter into a contract

1 “If an employer willfully fails to pay . . . any wages of an employee who is discharged or who quits, the wages of the employee shall continue as a penalty from…

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.