Category: Case Updates

Major Win Against Fraudulent Transfer Case

In a huge win, Ad Astra prevailed on a motion for summary judgment in a fraudulent transfer action. Our client has a judgment against him individually for claims involving a real estate transaction. His family has an irrevocable trust that holds most of the client’s family’s assets. He created the trust when his wife was alive and began the process before the claims in the real estate matter arose. The client and his wife completed the trust after the client’s and the judgment creditor’s claims were filed. Upon her death, the trust became irrevocable. The client’s wife sadly died of cancer during the pendency of the real estate arbitration, and it was her wish that her family’s assets be protected for their four children. Ultimately, the arbitrator found against the client who now has a judgment against him personally, but not his trust. He is neither the trustee nor the beneficiary of the irrevocable trust. He has a life estate in the home he resides in, but otherwise no interest in the trust. Those facts did not stop an aggressive plaintiff’s counsel from bringing the action.

In an effort to collect on its judgment from the arbitration, the judgment creditor first recorded abstracts of judgment from the underlying real estate arbitration on properties owned by the trust. Then, the creditor filed a separate lawsuit against the client claiming that he had transferred his assets to the family trust to avoid his obligations. Ad Astra conducted discovery and deposed the CEO of the judgment creditor. It became clear that the judgment creditor had nothing more than pure speculation as to why the client transferred the family’s property to an irrevocable trust. Using discovery responses and deposition testimony, Ad Astra was able to prove that there was no issue of fact to decide at trial since the judgment creditor plaintiff admittedly had no evidence. Pure speculation and conjecture will not a summary judgment motion overcome. The client is overjoyed at this milestone on his path to putting his disputes behind him. As for Ad Astra, we live for great results like this one!

Implied Dedication of Real Property Subject of Three-Day Trial (in Santa Clara County)

Partner Geoffrey Murry recently tried a case in Santa Clara County Superior Court on the issue of implied public dedication of a portion of a client’s residential property in Saratoga, California. During a three-day bench trial, the parties presented evidence regarding use of the property as a public-access trail in the years prior to 1972, the early-1960s construction of the subdivision in which the property is located, planning commission requirements in advance of approval of a subdivision map, and other interesting details about the charming San Jose suburb dating back more than 50 years. It was a great experience for Geoffrey, who welcomes every opportunity to represent clients in unusual real estate-related disputes, particularly relating to use and occupation of property by third parties.

TTAB Trial Win for Jack Herer Trademark

After a long-fought battle before the Trademark Trial and Appeals Board (TTAB), Katy Young prevailed at trial which secured the client’s right to register four (4) trademarks. The client is a business run by the son of late famous hemp activist Jack Herer. The dispute was about who has the rights to Jack Herer’s name and signature. The client had filed four trademark applications, all using Jack Herer’s name: one for an online shop, one for t-shirts, one for smoker’s articles, and another for smoker’s articles but using Jack’s signature instead of being a word mark only. The son of Jack Herer’s former girlfriend filed trademark oppositions for all four applications, claiming that he has a contract that gives him all rights to Jack Herer’s name, likeness, and signature. At trial, the Trademark Trial and Appeals Board found that he had not met his burden to prove the existence of a contract that gave him such rights. The client is thrilled to be able to register and use their trademarks.

Malicious Prosecution Settled!

Katy Young settled a malicious prosecution action in favor of our client. The client was scheduled for trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court on December 19, 2022 against Defendants for breach of contract and fraud. Defendants had a cross-complaint on file as well. On December 5, Defendants unexpectedly filed an entirely new action in Federal Court, alleging causes of action that should have been brought in their cross-complaint in state court. Ad Astra got the federal case dismissed on the first motion. 

A few months later, Defendants filed a new state court action against our client, again for causes of action that should have been in their cross-complaint in the main case. The new case went to a different judge than the one handling the main case. Ad Astra moved that the cases be related and assigned to the judge in the main case. The court agreed, and the cases were related and moved to the main judge’s court. Upon relating the cases, Defendants dismissed their second state court action. 

Upon prevailing at trial in the main case, the client brought a malicious prosecution action against the Defendants for wrongfully filing two other cases in an effort to harass her and diminish her capability of prosecuting her claims in the main case. The lawyer for the Defendants was named as a defendant in the malicious prosecution case. Insurance defense counsel came in to defend the lawyer and offered a good settlement after some effort on Ad Astra’s part. The client feels vindicated and appreciated our tireless efforts to represent her interests.