General Information
Overview
Trial Lawyers With Decades Of Courtroom Experience
Partners and trial lawyers Gerald A. Klein, P.C., Mark B. Wilson, P.C. and Michael S. LeBoff, P.C. each have more than 20 years of experience in the courtroom trying "bet the company" cases with millions of dollars at stake. The firm represents both plaintiffs and defendants in business and commercial litigation matters, including contract, partnership, shareholder, real estate, and intellectual property disputes. The firm also represents injured clients in legal malpractice cases. The firm's partners effectively bring their persuasive arguments to life with state-of-the-art multimedia in every big case they try and almost all the cases they try are big cases.
Klein & Wilson has recovered over $250 million in plaintiffs' cases and have won defense verdicts in "bet the company" cases. The firm's trial track record speaks for itself. The firm's attorneys have won over 90% of the cases they have taken to trial. It is common for Klein & Wilson to receive telephone calls from the parties they defeat, asking Klein & Wilson to represent them in future matters.
What makes Klein & Wilson so unique is its combination of trial experience and business acumen. Our trial experience and results speak for themselves. Klein & Wilson is a business. When you hire Klein & Wilson, you talk to its owners. We regularly consult with CPAs, economists, valuation experts, and appraisers. We speak your language. Klein & Wilson has battled some of the finest law firms in the nation and achieved stunning results. In addition to the firm's litigation success, the firm continues to place a premium on client service. Klein & Wilson's clients receive highly personalized service from a firm that understands the importance of courtesy and professionalism. Our clients are the reason we are in business. Klein & Wilson also assists clients in shareholder disputes, contract disputes, and other commercial litigation matters. To speak with a lawyer at Klein & Wilson about a limited liability partnership dispute or a limited liability company dispute call 949-478-0521, or contact the firm by email.
Rankings
Klein & Wilson is metro ranked in 5 practice areas. Best Law Firms rankings are based on a rigorous evaluation process.
Read how Best Law Firms ranks firmsMetro Rankings
Firm Leadership
Highlighted Client Comments
Rankings
Metro Rankings
Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
- Litigation - Intellectual Property
- Litigation - Real Estate
- Professional Malpractice Law - Plaintiffs
Individuals Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America®
Client Comments
Awards
- U.S. News & World Report Best Law Firms
- Best Lawyers
- The American Lawyer Top 500 Law Firms
- AV Rating Martindale-Hubbell
- Perfect 10 Rating AVVO
- American Board of Trial Advocates
- Orange County Trial Lawyer of the Year
- Orange County Bar Association, Chair of Business Litigation Section
- America's Top 100 Attorneys
- Super Lawyers Top 50 Orange County
- Rue Ratings' Best Attorneys of America
Office Locations
Management and Personnel
Significant Matters
Doe v. Roe Corporation ($97 Million)
Klein & Wilson‘s client was embroiled in probate litigation that had been pending for more than five years against the State of California and one of the largest trust companies in the world. With no end in sight, the client retained Klein & Wilson to see if it could settle the case or try it, if necessary. Klein & Wilson prepared an analysis of the complex issues the client faced, determined the client needed a new team of professionals, and plotted a plan to settle the highly contentious case. Klein & Wilson interviewed and hired new probate and tax counsel and guided them (and the client’s existing professionals) to a historic $97 million settlement.
Doe Corporation v. Roe Corporation ($12 Million)
Klein & Wilson represented a staffing company seeking $6 million of damages from a hospital. As a result of discovery efforts, Klein & Wilson was able to prove breach of contract and also developed substantial evidence of fraud. After the court initially denied Klein & Wilson‘s request for a writ of attachment, Klein & Wilson presented newly discovered evidence and convinced the court to reverse its ruling and issue a writ of attachment. Immediately before trial, the hospital offered to pay Klein & Wilson‘s client approximately $6 million. The client rejected that offer given the strength of the fraud case Klein & Wilson developed. Klein & Wilson resolved the case on the first day of trial with the client recovering $6 million of damages, reimbursement of all the client’s attorneys’ fees, and the hospital was required to award the client a new contract valued at an additional $6 million.
ReadyLink HealthCare v. Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard & Smith, LLP ($9 Million)
The defendant law firm charged its client almost $5 million in legal fees while handling four sophisticated trade secrets and business cases. None of the four cases went well for the client, despite the fact the client paid millions of dollars of attorneys’ fees. The client hired Klein & Wilson to handle the malpractice case against former counsel, one of the largest law firms in the United States. After a two month long jury trial, the jury awarded Klein & Wilson‘s client every penny it requested on its breach of contract and malpractice claims and awarded the defendant law firm nothing on its cross-claims. The case drew significant attention from the California legal community, and the Los Angeles Daily Journal ran a front-page story about this case.
Bentley-Wing Property W, LLC v. West Development Inc. & West Partners, LLC ($6 Million Defense Judgment)
Klein & Wilson defended a company and its wealthy owner in an action involving a real estate syndicate in San Diego County.
The plaintiff claimed Klein & Wilson‘s clients breached various contractual obligations and fiduciary duties, effectively making the plaintiff’s partnership interest worthless. Plaintiff hoped to take advantage of the “wealth card” to convince the trier of fact he was cheated out of millions of dollars promised to him for years of hard work. Klein & Wilson presented evidence showing the plaintiff was a double dealer who preyed on several former partners. Klein & Wilson proved plaintiff was a sophisticated real estate professional who enticed Klein & Wilson‘s client into investing with him.
The firm showed that if anyone breached a fiduciary duty on the contractual provision, it was plaintiff himself. After almost three weeks of testimony, Klein & Wilson moved for judgment at the close of plaintiff’s case and won, without having to put on any evidence. The court dismissed plaintiff’s $6 million claim and entered judgment in favor of Klein & Wilson‘s client.
Affinitec v. Siemens ($5.7 Million)
Klein & Wilson won a verdict of approximately $5 million on behalf of its software client against Siemens Business Communications, Inc., one of the largest companies in the world. Klein & Wilson’s client prevailed on all its breach of contract claims and recovered 99 percent of all the damages it requested from the jury. Siemens filed a cross-complaint against Klein & Wilson‘s client but recovered nothing.
Doe Corporation v. Roe Corporation ($4.1 Million)
Klein & Wilson represented a securities brokerage firm victimized by a raid. Klein & Wilson proved that departing brokers plotted with their new firm to steal a confidential database that was indispensable to launching their new firm. Klein & Wilson also proved the departing brokers and their new firm engaged in a conspiracy to destroy evidence.
A special master held an evidentiary hearing to determine whether it should enter terminating sanctions against defendants based on destruction of evidence. It was obvious to everyone after the first three days of testimony the brokers were going to lose. So, several of the brokers settled the case for a seven-figure sum before there was a court award against them. The three primary wrongdoers proceeded to the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing. As expected, the special master recommended terminating sanctions. After receiving the special master’s report, the trial judge engaged in a comprehensive review of the hearing and an independent analysis of the evidence. He agreed with the referee and entered judgment against the remaining brokers. The client’s total recovery was $4,158,102.
Does Corporation v. Roes ($3 Million)
Klein & Wilson represented a company which hired design professionals and a general contractor to construct a sales facility in Central California. The designers and contractors made a number of errors, resulting in construction defects. Because of insurance coverage issues, the defendants’ insurance carriers refused to settle until Klein & Wilson took approximately 50 depositions and proved that each defendant had serious exposure. After several mediations, Klein & Wilson recovered $3 million for its client – enough money for the client to make the necessary repairs to its facility.
Doe Law Firm v. Roe Corporation ($2.1 Million)
Klein & Wilson represented a client who was sued for approximately $800,000 in unpaid fees by its former law firm and the law firm’s expert in the underlying case. Klein & Wilson filed a cross-complaint against the law firm, alleging legal malpractice and over billing. Klein & Wilson won approximately 20 different motions and persuaded the court to issue almost $150,000 in sanctions against the law firm for various discovery abuses. Before trial started, Klein & Wilson persuaded the court that the law firm likely committed fraud, resulting in an order entitling Klein & Wilson to conduct discovery regarding the net worth of the firm and its members. After one day of trial, the expert voluntarily dismissed its complaint and received no money. The law firm also dismissed its complaint without receiving a penny, and it paid Klein & Wilson‘s client $1.3 million to settle the legal malpractice claim, resulting in a settlement valued at $2.1 million.
Doe Corporation v. Roe Law Firm ($1.8 Million)
Klein & Wilson‘s client hired a prominent law firm to evaluate its employment practices. After the law firm changed the company’s policies, the law firm said the company was good to go. Years later, the company’s employees filed a class action lawsuit alleging the company’s policies (which the law firm wrote) violated numerous Labor Code sections. The law firm said the client would defeat the class action in a summary judgment motion. After mediating the employment case, the law firm determined it made mistakes and advised the client to settle. At a binding arbitration before three retired judges, Klein & Wilson proved the law firm breached its fee agreement (by charging fees for work that had no value) and fell below the standard of care (by steering the client into Labor Code violations). The arbitrators ordered the law firm to disgorge its fees and pay damages which, after correction by the court, total $1.8 million.