Steefel Levitt & Weiss v. Astor Holdings, Inc.

MEMORANDUM *

Astor Holdings, Inc. and related corporate entities (“Astor”), and Astor’s owner Steven Plotnicki individually, appeal the district court’s order entering judgment after a jury trial in favor of law firms Pascoe & Rafton (“Pascoe”) and Steefel, Levitt & Weiss (“Steefel”) on the law firms’ claims for unpaid fees for legal ser *720 vices. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

I. Roski III

This court reviews de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment. Anthem Electronics, Inc. v. Pacific Employers Ins. Co., 302 F.3d 1049, 1054 (9th Cir.2002). The district court did not err in granting Steefel’s and Pascoe’s motions for summary judgment on Astor’s malpractice claims in connection with litigation against Edward Roski (the “Roski III ” litigation).

To prevail on a claim of legal malpractice under California law, the plaintiff must establish the basic elements of negligence: duty, breach of duty, causation, and damages. Nichols v. Keller, 15 Cal. App.4th 1672 , 19 Cal.Rptr.2d 601, 607 (1993). Astor claims both Steefel and Pascoe committed malpractice by failing to advise Astor…