Ehrlich Law Firm wins affirmance of $15 million verdict
On July 14, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a $15 million jury verdict on behalf of three Los Angeles Police Department officers who had been wrongfully accused by the department of corruption.  In Harper v. City of Los Angeles __ F.3d __ (9th Cir. 2008), the court held that the evidence supported the jury's verdict that the officers' constitutional rights were violated, and that the award of $5,000,001 to each was not excessive.  Jeffrey Isaac Ehrlich briefed and argued the appeal for the officers.
 

Ehrlich Law Firm wins appeal invalidating Kaiser arbitration agreement
A victim of Kaiser’s kidney-transplant program fiasco will have his lawsuit heard by a jury, and not by a panel of arbitrators as a result of the Ehrlich law firm’s victory in Burks v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plans (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 1021.  The California Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District, in Sacramento, held on March 5, 2008, that Kaiser’s enrollment form failed to comply with the statutory disclosure requirements concerning arbitration clauses, and as a result the arbitration provision could not be enforced.  The decision not only benefits Mr. Burks, but will allow other Kaiser members who signed similar defective enrollment forms to pursue their claims before a jury, in accordance with the constitutional right to a jury trial.
 

 Ehrlich Law Firm wins insurance bad-faith victory in California Supreme Court
Insurance companies in California can no longer prevail in bad-faith lawsuits brought by their policyholders simply by showing that there was a “dispute” about whether the insurer should pay the claim.  In Wilson v. 21^st Century Ins. Co. (2007) 42 Cal.4^th 713, the Supreme Court reined in the so-called “genuine dispute rule” that had become the insurance industries’ most potent defense in bad-faith cases, holding that the rule only applied at the summary-judgment stage, and then only in cases where a jury would be unable to make a finding that the insurer had acted unreasonably.  The Wilson ruling makes it much harder for insurers to obtain summary judgment in bad-faith lawsuit.
 

Ehrlich Law Firm wins writ proceeding invalidating Health Net arbitration agreement
The Court of Appeal in Los Angeles has reversed a trial court’s order requiring that Mary Medeiros arbitrate her claims against Health Net, arising from the company’s failure to provide her with timely medical care.  Even though Health Net’s enrollment form failed to comply with the mandatory disclosure requirements concerning arbitration clauses, the trial court ordered the case to arbitration.  The Ehrlich Law Firm filed a writ of mandate, which was granted in a published opinion. (Medeiros v. Superior Court (Health Net) (2007) 146 Cal.App.4th 1008.  Medeiros is a victory for public employees, because it held that health plans that provide coverage through public agencies must comply with the arbitration-disclosure requirements in the Health & Safety Code and the Insurance Code.  

Ehrlich Law Firm obtains emergency stay from Court of Appeal for trial lawyer seeking to recuse trial judge
When a trial lawyer’s case was transferred from one Superior Court Judge to another at the Mosk Courthouse, the trial lawyer filed a peremptory challenge under Code Civ. Proc. section 170.6.  The trial judge ruled that the challenge was not timely filed, because it had not been made at the moment the transfer was announced — before counsel even had a chance to confer with his client.  The Ehrlich Law Firm was able to file an emergency writ petition within 24 hours of being retained, and the Court of Appeal granted a stay within 2 hours after the papers were filed.  The matter later settled, rendering the proceeding moot. Badalyans v. Aghadjanians, 2/6/08.