Lemmer

Lemmer v. Charney

Good Law
125 Cal. Rptr. 3d 502·195 Cal. App. 4th 99·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 540
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 5, 2011No. B222603California1,946 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Grimes, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of dismissal after the trial court sustained a demurrer to the first amended complaint without leave to amend in an action by an attorney against a former client and his wife for fraud and intentional interference with prospective advantage. The gist of the action is that the attorney agreed to change the terms of his compensation from the payment of an hourly fee to a contingency fee in reliance on his client’s fraudulent promise to take the case to trial or settlement, the wife conspired to defraud the attorney, and she also interfered with the attorney’s prospective economic advantage by supporting her husband’s decision to abandon his lawsuit. Finding public policy articulated in well-established California Supreme Court authority bars this action, we affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Don S. Lemmer, doing business as the Lemmer Law Firm, represented Jeffrey Charney (defendant) in a lawsuit against defendant’s *102 former employer, Teleflora LLC. Defendant had been employed as Teleflora’s executive vice-president and chief marketing officer in Los Angeles for about five months in 2004. Before filing suit, defendant signed an…

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.