Corporate & Partnership Litigation

Pestotnik + Gold LLP attorneys have diverse experience in a variety of corporate and partnership litigation, including cases involving officer, director and partner liability, partnership disputes, disputes involving LLC members, shareholder derivative suits, mergers and acquisitions litigation, securities class action litigation, and other civil lawsuits involving allegations of breach of contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, improper disclosure, accounting irregularities, recklessness, negligence, or mismanagement. For example:

Stone Canyon Venture Partners, LP v. Paul Orfalea.
Our firm represented the plaintiff partnership in obtaining over $8 million in settlement (while our motion for summary judgment was pending). This partnership action was brought against 6 limited partners, and we recovered 100% of the funds our client was owed, plus interest.

Herman v. Crosswater Financial Corp., et al.; and Faith v. KPMG, et al.
Pestotnik + Gold LLP is co-counsel for Tremont Group Holdings, Inc. and related entities in lawsuits filed in San Diego Superior Court arising out of the Ponzi scheme and securities fraud masterminded by Bernard L. Madoff, and his firm Madoff Securities.

In re PETCO Animal Supplies, Inc. Shareholder Litigation.
Pestotnik + Gold LLP was co-counsel for Texas Pacific Group who, along with defendant Leonard Green Partners, purchased all of PETCO’s public stock in a leveraged buy-out. Plaintiffs, represented by the Coughlin Stoia law firm, sought a preliminary injunction to prevent the shareholders from voting on the acquisition. Pestotnik + Gold LLP was part of the defense team that successfully defeated plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction, and the shareholders then voted to approve the acquisition. Our clients were ultimately dismissed with prejudice, and paid nothing.

Pronko v. Tyson.
Our firm represented Valeant Pharmaceuticals International in this shareholder derivative action alleging stock option backdating and spring-loading. The case settled with our client paying nothing to the plaintiffs.

In re SureBeam Securities Litigation.
Our lawyers represented some of the directors and officers who were sued in a federal court class action lawsuit alleging securities fraud. After our motion to dismiss was granted in part, and denied in part, the lawsuit settled with insurance funds. The director and officer clients paid no money to anyone.

In re Mitek Securities Litigation.
Our lawyers represented a software company and its officers in a Rule 10b-5, Section 20(a) and Section 16(b) securities class action. Plaintiffs alleged improper revenue recognition for software sales following a restatement of earnings, and alleged short term stock sales liability.

Palacios v. Billing Concepts, Inc.
Our lawyers represented Billing Concepts, Inc. a long distance billing service provider, which was sued in a class action alleging fraud in connection with collect telephone calls placed from Mexico. With our motion attacking class certification pending, plaintiffs settled the case for a nominal amount, a tiny fraction of what was sought.

Hermann v. Miller & Schroeder.
Our lawyers represented two stock brokers in a multi-party state court lawsuit alleging securities fraud in connection with the sale of bonds. After the court sustained a demurrer on behalf of our broker clients, the plaintiffs dismissed the case against our remaining clients.

Mandleberg v. USLD Communications.
Our lawyers’ motion to dismiss was granted in favor of our Texas-based telecommunications client, USLD Communications, in a federal court lawsuit.

Bevco v. Maizoro, S.A.
Our lawyers obtained complete dismissals of a large Mexican corporate client and its officers in a federal court action on the grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction.

Williamson v. General Dynamics Corporation.
Our lawyers obtained a court-ordered dismissal on behalf of General Dynamics Corporation in a federal court class action brought on behalf of 4,000 former General Dynamics managers who asserted damage claims in excess of $2 billion.

CRA v. Brady.
Our lawyers obtained summary judgment in favor or their client, General Dynamics Corporation, in a state court class action brought by the Milberg Weiss law firm on behalf of former employees of General Dynamics Corporation.

Newell v. American Tool Companies, Inc.
Our lawyers represented a director in this shareholder action in Illinois state court that involved control of a corporation by a 49% minority shareholder. The case settled without any payment by or on behalf of our client.