“Panoramic view,” “expansive view,” “scenic view”—these are all common descriptions used to market highly coveted view property. A great view can substantially increase the desirability and value of a property, with view properties often selling for hundreds of thousands of dollars more than neighboring properties of comparable square footage without views. Developers also routinely charge substantially more for premium lots with views in new developments. In most cases, however, the property owner’s view is not protected and, accordingly, buyers unwittingly pay a hefty surcharge for something that can be taken away without recourse.”
Nationwide Biweekly Administration, Inc., Loan Payment Administration, LLC, and Daniel S. Lipsky, the alleged alter ego, principal and sole shareholder of Nationwide and Loan Payment (collectively petitioners) operate a debt payment service that claims to reduce the amount of interest owed by accelerating debt repayment via an extra annual payment. The California Department of Business Oversight and the District Attorneys of four counties (collectively the People) challenge a number of petitioners’ business practices and in the underlying action seek civil penalties under Business and Professions Code sections 17200 and 17500, and Financial Code section 12105, subdivision (d), as well as injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement, the voiding of petitioners’ allegedly unlawful contracts, costs and attorney fees. In conjunction with their answer, petitioners demanded a jury trial, which the People successfully moved to strike.
In a groundbreaking decision, the appellate court overturned years of precedent which denied businesses the right to a jury trial in civil enforcement actions brought by the State of California against businesses. In this matter, the State of California sought tens of millions from a client for alleged unfair business practices and sought to do so without the right to a jury trial. Attorney Ponist successfully argued that trial without a jury violated his clients’ fundamental, constitutional rights, arguing, in part, “California has never afforded parties lesser rights than what they’re afforded under the United States Constitution. That’s never happened. It’s not that you come to California, you might get higher minimum wage, better environmental protections, but when it comes to Constitutional rights, tough luck.”
May 22, 2018
San Diego County Bar Association, San Francisco Bar Association, Scientific Association of Forensic Examiners
A legal education seminar covering expert reports, motions in limine, federal and state expert disclosure, exchange and report requirements as well as litigation tactics at each stage in the process. The program further discussed the seminal Daubert/Sargon decisions as well as how to attack and how to defend an expert’s report and opinions.
The Ponist Law Group defended a laboratory against claims that it had erroneously switched paternity testing results, allegedly inaccurately indicating that one man was the father of the subject child when, according to plaintiff, it was another man. According to plaintiff, this caused “irreparable damage” and “emotional distress.” The Ponist Law Group was able to successfully resolve the matter early for a nuisance settlement.
Orange County Bar Association, San Diego County Bar Association, San Francisco Bar Association (March 27, 2018)
A legal education seminar covering agency and dual agency law in California generally, with an in-depth analysis of the California Supreme Court’s landmark Horiike decision as well as the impact on agency and dual agency responsibilities following the Horiike decision and legislative proposals following the Horiike decision.
The Ponist Law Group represented an elderly client in an arbitration in connection with the purchase of a business and asserted claims for breach of contract, rescission, fraud/misrepresentation and financial elder abuse. Following a multi-week arbitration proceeding, the Ponist Law Group was able to reach a favorable resolution on behalf of our client.
“The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is set to face its first jury trial in April in what is shaping up to be a critical test of the agency’s authority … Ponist said he hoped to put the bureau’s Choke Point tactics on trial, and prove that the CFPB failed to provide Nationwide with the opportunity to respond to the allegations before it filed its lawsuit. “Our position is that it’s not fair, it’s just not right that the federal government came up with a way to pressure businesses that they do not like, for their own reasons, by putting pressure on their banking partners,” Ponist said. “Rather than giving companies their day in court, what they do instead is threaten [their bank partners] with subpoenas, an investigation, an audit, if they don’t comply.””
Representing multiple families, the Ponist Law Group alleged that a rogue broker of a securities broker-dealer, charged with managing the accounts of their clients, improperly churned the clients’ accounts, excessively traded the clients’ accounts and placed the clients in unsuitable investments. The Ponist Law Group was able to successfully negotiate a settlement for $2.2 million on behalf of their clients.
- Attorney Schneider authors article published in the Daily Journal entitled “Do you have a fundamental right to a view in California?” November 1, 2018
- The Ponist Law Group Obtains a Dismissal of the Action Based on the Pleadings and Judgment in Client’s Favor August 23, 2018
- NBA Appellate Opinion June 13, 2018
- In a Published Decision, Attorneys Ponist and Yockelson Secure Right to Jury Trial for Businesses in BP 17200/17500 Civil Enforcement Actions June 13, 2018
- How to Keep Your Expert In and Keep Their Expert Out May 22, 2018
- The Ponist Law Group Favorably Resolves Paternity Testing Claim Against Laboratory May 14, 2018
- Dual Agency Law. Following the California Supreme Court’s Landmark HORIIKE Decision March 27, 2018
- The Ponist Law Group Reaches Favorable Confidential Settlement on Behalf Elderly Client Defrauded in Connection with Purchase of a Business March 9, 2018