Litigation

RHRC's attorneys have decades of experience successfully representing clients in real estate and business litigation. RHRC has been recognized as one of the Bay Area's top rated law firms. Our attorneys have been AV Preeminent Rated, the highest possible rating by Martindale-Hubbell for legal ability and ethical standards. RHRC's attorneys have also been selected as Super Lawyers for excellence in practice for 10 years.

Our seasoned team of professionals is dedicated to providing the best prosecution and defense of claims for our clients. Recognizing the burdensome cost of litigation, RHRC uses its field expertise and comprehensive knowledge of the law to litigate and resolve cases in the most effective means possible, always working for our clients' best interests.

Real estate and business are specialized practices of law necessitating the advice, counsel, and advocacy of attorneys who understand the intricate details involved in every aspect. Our partners have contributed to the development of California real estate forms, leading California treatises on current law, and speaking on the current state of ever-changing laws, thus providing an advantageous knowledge of the law and how best to protect our clients' interests.

RHRC's attorneys are assertive, innovative, professional litigators with a proven track record of performance committed to providing legal excellence to every client. Your real estate and business investments are your most important investments. RHRC's expansive experience and skill make its attorneys the best litigators to protect and defend those investments.

RECENT CASES

In Re: Nvidia Corporation, Inc. v. Extreme Networks, Inc. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case #1-01-CV-803483). RHRC defended a multinational software company in a lease dispute. The settlement was confidential.

In Re: Tam v. Prestige Realty, et al. (Alameda County Superior Court Case #RG03080609). Arbitrated a case against sellers who tried to perform a "commissiondectomy" on the listing broker (refusing to pay the broker for services). The broker had an exclusive listing agreement and diligently marketed the property. Sellers, unbeknownst to the broker, entered into a purchase contract with one prospective buyer directly, cheating the broker of her commission. The broker sued for her full commission plus attorney's fees. After two days of arbitration, sellers realized they were losing the case and agreed to a mutually satisfactory settlement.

In Re: Mimosa Capital Partners v. Scott (mediation). Represented purchasers of a funeral home business who were defrauded by the seller regarding the business relationships, income, and expenses. Through mediation, we succeeded in reducing the original purchase price by 50% and securing financing terms more favorable to our clients.

In Re: Assadi-Jozani v. Prevedello, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case #CV 794028). On the eve of trial, the firm obtained a confidential settlement for a commercial landlord whose tenant attempted to claim that his rent payments were actually mortgage payments due to a series of oral representations.

In Re: Zaccor, et al. v. Marguerit (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case #CV771883). Represented business owners whose bookkeeper embezzled nearly $1 million from half a dozen business and personal accounts over a 15-year period. Using a forensic accountant to trace the embezzled money, we collected $200,000 from the former employee.

In Re: Overland Development v. Gilroy Presbyterian Church (binding arbitration). Represented a developer in an action against a church for breach of contract and specific performance on a land sale agreement. The case resulted in an award in excess of $1 million.

In Re: Mullin v. Benaron, et al. (San Mateo County Superior Court Case #CIV 431399). Settled case in mid-arbitration in favor of sellers of residential real property, who were sued by their buyer for failing to disclose foundation issues. After the buyer's deposition was taken, he settled for a complete walkaway.

In Re: Kennedy v. Nakai, et al. (San Mateo County Superior Court Case #413396). Represented an elderly Japanese couple in a legal malpractice action. When a developer wanted to buy their small nursery in Palo Alto for residential purposes, they hired an inexperienced attorney who failed to advise them how to evaluate the prospective buyer and what terms and conditions should be included in the purchase agreement. When buyer failed to perform on time, our clients wanted to cancel the deal, and buyer sued them. After settling that action in our clients' favor, we sued their former attorney; his insurance company paid the policy limits and reimbursed our clients for all damages they incurred.

In Re: The Ridgecrest Group, Inc. v. Aghili (San Mateo County Superior Court Case #415942). Represented a group of plaintiffs relating to a breach of partnership agreement claim relating to the purchase, development, and construction of residential property in Menlo Park. The Court awarded plaintiffs in excess of $200,000.

In Re: Ward v. Fox, et al. (San Mateo County Superior Court Case #413014). Defended a multi-million-dollar mortgage loan company in an action brought by a former principal who sued for alleged breach of an employment agreement. The mortgage loan business cross-complained for breach of promissory notes signed in its favor by the former principal. Successfully negotiated a resolution of the disputes.

In Re: Dowd v. Flagstar Corporation, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case #CV 769441). Defended a corporation owning over 3,000 restaurants against a property owner and landlord who was trying to terminate one restaurant's lease, prevailing at trial and obtaining all the corporation's attorneys' fees from the property owner.

In Re: Jonathan v. Prawat (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case #1-01-CV800177). Defended a homeowner in an action by a contractor seeking $400,000 arising out of a construction contract. The firm cross-complained against the contractor, seeking damages for fraud, and won a judgment including attorneys' fees in excess of $900,000.

In Re: Hogue v. Myer, et al. (binding arbitration). Prosecuted a case for buyers who discovered that their high-end home in the Los Gatos Foothills had non-disclosed defects which would cost at least $150,000 to repair. Obtained a judgment in the buyers' favor for the difference between what they paid for the property and its actual worth its true condition.

In Re: Hewell & Sheedy v. Fayram (binding arbitration). Represented a builder and obtained all damages sought against a homeowner who failed to pay for change orders in a home remodeling project.