• Auto Defense
• Premises Liability
• Products Liability
• Employment Law
• General Civil Litigation
• Business Litigation
• Dental Malpractice
• Bad Faith

Business

The firm has an active business practice department engaged in all manner of modern business questions. Attorneys in the Firm's business department have recently assisted several local entrepreneurs in reviewing their business plan to select the entity model best suited for their new business, which will entail the developing and marketing of computer network goods and services across numerous states. The project also required the Firm to structure employment contracts for the new company's internal personnel, as well as the negotiation and authoring of multiple independent contractor agreements covering services to be performed across the United States. Wesierski & Zurek's attorneys also worked on a daily basis with the new company to implement appropriate procedures to insure its compliance with the vast array of employment requirements for new businesses in California.

Attorneys from the Firm's business department also recently worked with the owners of an international importing business to properly structure the enterprise to operate in California. Once the determination was made to utilize the corporate structure, Wesierski & Zurek's attorneys devoted all the requisite efforts to this time intensive project to get the clients' business up and running to the great satisfaction of the clients. Aside from organization of the entity, the Firm's lawyers successfully reviewed and assisted in the negotiation of the lease for the company's new business premises in order that operations could commence in a timely fashion. Moreover, our Firms' lawyers also undertook the preparation of all appropriate non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements necessary to streamline the clients' many consultations with other businesses offering essential cooperative services. The Firm will continue to assist the company in its developing business with the ongoing review of all of its business sales contracts.

Attorneys from the Firms' business department have recently assisted in the drafting of an employee handbook for a Southern California manufacturing company that sells its products nationwide. The project required Wesierski & Zurek's lawyers to thoroughly review all company policies and practices in order to distill them into a comprehensive handbook applicable for all of the company's employees. In addition, our Firm's attorneys also worked together with clients to author the company's requisite policy statement regarding sexual harassment.

The Firm's business department lawyers have also recently prepared numerous employer-employee agreements for several of the Firm's clients. Those agreements have included such areas as: (1) Employee Proprietary Information and Assignment of Inventions Agreement; (2) Agreement of Services for Software Development; (3) Agreement of Services for Software Maintenance; and, (4) Intellectual Property Ownership, Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement.

In a recent business case handled by Christopher P. Wesierski (Senior Partner/Irvine Office), an Orange County jury found in favor of the defense where plaintiff alleged intentional misrepresentation of facts; concealment; negligent misrepresentation of facts; and negligence.

A 40-year-old business man whose company handled property maintenance was being sued by a corporation whose owner is a 50-year-old electrical contractor. Plaintiff claimed over $800,000 in lost monies. They alleged that an employee stole and embezzled from them close to $500,000 over an 8 year period plus interest to total $800,000. The employee had previously worked at the defendant's place of business. The plaintiff's claim was that he called the defendant to get a recommendation for the employee and the defendant did not disclose that she had stolen monies from them as well. Defendant contended that he never had a conversation with plaintiff and that if he had he would have given limited information because at the time he only had a suspicion that the ex-employee had embezzled money.

Chris Wesierski kept plaintiff's expert from testifying by voir dire and showing the expert was not properly qualified to testify so the court excluded him.

The jury in 25 minutes came in 12 - 0, for the defense with the two alternates advising they would have voted the same way. Defendant will recover all costs.

Wesierski & Zurek is proud to represent most of the grocery chains in the California area. Frank D'Oro has twice done the remarkable in regard to his grocery store clients - gone to trial and achieved back to back to back defense verdicts.

In the year 2008 - Mr. D'Oro obtained a defense verdict in three separate matters all within one week of each other and all decided by jury trial. Each of those cases took less than ten days.

In the year 2007 - Mr. D'Oro obtained three separate jury trial wins in cases tried within one week of each other. Each of those jury verdicts resulted in a defense case as well.

Congratulations Mr. D'Oro for a truly remarkable string of victories.

Frank D'Oro (Senior Partner/Los Angeles Office) continued his winning ways with a defense verdict in Los Angeles. Holmes v. Numero Uno Market was tried between April 25, 2006 - May 5, 2006 in LA Superior Court, and resulted in a defense verdict. Plaintiff Clyde Holmes was a 65-year-old shopper at the Numero Uno Market in South Central LA where he alleges he was injured as a result of being knocked down by a shoplifter that store security had negligently allowed to escape. While shopping on a Sunday morning Mr. Holmes observed store security guards take a suspected shoplifter into custody and into a back room. According to plaintiff, the suspect was able to flee after he was told he was going to be prosecuted because he had detained after being taken off the sales floor. The suspect ran out of the back room being chased by several security guards. Mr. Holmes was on the sales floor directly in front of the back room door and alleges he was knocked to the ground in the melee that ensued when the suspect and security guards ran out onto the sales floor. The allegation of negligence was that the standard of care required a shoplifting suspect be detained in a secure environment, separated from the sales floor after apprehension.

As a result of being knocked to the ground, plaintiff alleged that he aggravated a pre-existing degenerative arthritis in his knee. After a course of physical therapy and steroid injections plaintiff underwent arthroscopic surgery without success. His symptoms continued to deteriorate and plaintiff became a candidate for total knee replacement. Plaintiff was retired and he alleged that his quality of life was severely diminished and he was “hobbled” to the point where he was barely able to walk. He asked the jury for an award of $450,000.

Store personnel disputed plaintiff's version of how the accident happened. However, the defense was hampered by the fact that the video tape for the store surveillance system was lost and many of the employees involved in the incident had since left their employment with Numero Uno Market. There was also a lack of prior medical records indicating prior knee complaints by plaintiff. The defense argued, and ultimately prevailed on the theory that the degenerative joint disease in plaintiff's knee was so advanced at the time of loss that his testimony that he was asymptomatic before the accident was not credible. The jury therefore found that plaintiff was not a credible witness and found for the defense.