Ellis Law Group, LLP v. Nevada City Sugar Loaf Properties, LLC

Full title: ELLIS LAW GROUP, LLP, Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Respondent, v. NEVADA…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento

Date published: Oct 22, 2014

No. C072820 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 22, 2014)

Opinion

Page 847b

230 Cal.App.4th 847b __ Cal.Rptr.3d __ ELLIS LAW GROUP, LLP, Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Respondent, v. NEVADA CITY SUGAR LOAF PROPERTIES, LLC, Defendant, Cross-complainant and Appellant. C072820 California Court of Appeals, Third District, Sacramento October 22, 2014

THE COURT.

THE OPINION filed October 3, 2014, 230 Cal.App.4th 244; ___ Cal.Rptr.3d ___ in the above cause is modified as follows:

On page 17 [230 Cal.App.4th 259, advance report, 4th par., continuing to page 260], delete the second full paragraph and replace it with the following:

Here, the record discloses no indicia of an attorney-client relationship between ELG and Major. For example, there was no attorney-client fee agreement as required by Business and Professions Code section 6148. Moreover, ELG procured legal malpractice insurance for Major by listing him as “of counsel” with the insurer. The record does not show Major used anything other than ELG computers and software to record his time. Major did not file an association of counsel to appear on the anti-SLAPP motion. However, ELG filed an association of counsel for another attorney, Larry Lockshin, for his assistance in defending ELG. Thus, ELG signaled it understood the need for a notice of association of counsel for outside counsel. The silence as to Major’s participation in the case is telling.

We concur HULL, Acting P. J. ROBIE, J.

This modification does not change the judgment.