Our California Offices
cube image
Solving legal
problems for
our clients
since 1950


Design Professionals Beware: Your Stamp May Cost You

Chester Walls

In the recent case of Beacon Residential Community Assn. v. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP (2014) 59 Cal.4th 568, 572, the California Supreme Court held that an architect owes a duty of care to homeowners where the architect is a principal architect on the project. A Principal Architect is one who is not subordinate to any other design professional-even if the architect does not actually build the project or exercise ultimate control over construction decisions.
Read More

Recent Appellate Decision May Help To Defeat Real Estate Fraud Claims in Specific Cases

In Steven Hoffman v. 162 North Wolfe LLC (Santa Clara County), The California Court of Appeals, Sixth District, has recently ruled that a property owner has no duty to disclose the existence of a prescriptive easement to a prospective purchaser of an adjoining parcel. The decision significantly narrows the duty of a neighboring easement holder to disclose facts related to the easement and also provides support for future dispositive motions.
Read More

Deducting an Exempt Employee’s Vacation/Paid Time Off Accruals for Partial Day Absences in any Increment Does Not Destroy their Exempt Status

Maribel Hernandez

On July 21, 2014, the California Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision in Lori Rhea v. General Atomics, Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2014 WL 3565429, holding that exempt employees may use accrued vacation/paid time off (PTO) leave time in any increment without jeopardizing an employee’s exempt status.
Read More

Ericksen Arbuthnot’s Appellate Practice Group Achieves Significant Victory: Court of Appeal Enforces Liability Release and Establishes New Precedent Awarding Deposition Subpoena Costs

Joseph Minioza Jason Mauck

Ericksen Arbuthnot’s Appellate Practice Group has notched another win. In a decision rendered on June 27, 2014, the First Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Ericksen Arbuthnot’s client and awarding deposition costs. (Naser v. Lakeridge 2014 WL 2922405.).
Read More


We wanted to know what our clients experience when they work with us, so we asked them.  Happily, we can say that our definition of service matches our clients’ expectations.

Here is what you can expect from our attorneys at law:


Our lawyers provide quick turn around to meet your needs.


You will always know the status of your matter.

Good judgment

We start with an early evaluation of your case to find the most effective way to solve problems.

Appropriate staffing

To maximize efficiency and accountability, we limit the number of attorneys who work on your case.


In each of our seven law offices, you have access to lawyers who have a depth of experience.