Attorney Charles Quentin Jakob's Legal Cases

Appeals

Gilman v. Dalby, 61 Cal. App. 5th 923 (2021)

Mar 12, 2021

OUTCOME: Reversed and remanded

An attorney named Gilman sued various people associated with the Dreyer, Babich personal injury law firm of Sacramento. Gilman lost at the trial court, but obtained a reversal on appeal. At that poi ... nt counsel for judgment creditors Phillips et al. -- who were not named parties in the underlying suit-- filed and served one or more lien notices in the trial court to enforce their judgments against Gilman. Without giving notice to the judgment creditors, Gilman caused the Sacramento County Superior Court to award him "restitution" of funds he had paid to the defendants under the judgment reversed on appeal. The Dreyer, Babich attorneys then paid that amount to Gilman despite the liens in the case. When Gilman and the Dreyer, Babich parties did not pay the amounts over to the judgment creditors, the judgment creditors moved for orders to that effect. The trial court, adopting legal arguments made by the Dreyer, Babich attorneys, ruled the creditors' liens did not attach to the "restituted" funds at issue. The Court of Appeal rejected those arguments and reversed the Sacramento County Superior Court in a published decision.

Bankruptcy and debt

Phillips v. Gilman, 887 F.3d 956 (9th Cir. 2018)

Apr 13, 2018

OUTCOME: The Ninth Circuit vacated an order from the bankruptcy court, which had been affirmed by U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter (C.D. Cal), awarding the debtor a homestead exemption of up to $ 100,000.

The clients, judgment creditors of debtor Gilman, appealed a bankruptcy court order awarding the debtor a homestead exemption of up to $ 100,000. The order was affirmed by Judge David Carter, U.S. Di ... strict Court for the Central District. Disagreeing with Judge Carter, the creditors appealed to the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit found jurisdiction and, finding error, vacated the orders of the bankruptcy court and district court.

Bankruptcy and debt

2016 WL 8115713 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2016)

Nov 23, 2016

OUTCOME: The debtor, an attorney, was denied a discharge in bankruptcy pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 727(a)(2)(B). A fee award was made in favor of the Plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs, judgment creditors in state litigation below, sought relief under 11 U.S.C. Sections 523 and 727 to prevent debtor, an attorney, from escaping liability for judgment debts. Following a " ... tri-furcated" trial (separating claims under Section 523 and dividing claims under Section 727), the bankruptcy court found it unnecessary to decide most of the plaintiffs' claims as the plaintiffs had shown the debtor-defendant's improper post-petition dispositions and concealment of estate property under 11 U.S.C. Section 727(a)(2)(B). This showing was sufficient to deny the debtor a discharge. The debtor had taken funds out of an investment account he had not scheduled. He had also taken and dissipated funds from two accounts he claimed as exempt despite knowing the exemption claim had been challenged. The judge rejected an "advice of counsel" defense. Debtor was represented by Mark Ellis and Brandon Reeves of Ellis Law Group, LLP of Sacramento, California.

Bankruptcy and debt

In re Gilman, 544 B.R. 184 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2016)

Jan 12, 2016

OUTCOME: Disallowance of Debtor's claim to a disability-based enhancement to a homestead exemption.

Debtor filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy relief and claimed a homestead exemption enhanced for alleged disability. The debtor claimed he had cancer. Judgment creditors objected to the claim of disablin ... g cancer and later secured medical records indicating the debtor could not show he had cancer or any disabling medical condition on the petition date. Following a trial, the judge found there was no showing of any disabling medical condition on the petition date and disallowed the exemption-enhancement claimed by the debtor. The court subsequently indicated it would be making a fee award.

Antitrust and trade law

In re Microsoft I-V Cases, 135 Cal. App. 4th 706 (2006)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Public interest matter to prevent abuse of class action mechanism through the approval of settlements paying cash to class attorneys but offering only vouchers/coupons of de minimis or negative net val ... ue to class members. Such settlements allow defendants and judges to steer predictably unclaimed settlement property to politically favored interest groups under the guise of the "cy pres doctrine," often in derogation of the very goals (e.g., enhancing competition) said to be served by substantive law underlying the class action suit.

Debt collection

27 Trials Digest 11th 5 (July 7, 2008)

N/A

OUTCOME: Summary judgment against collection complaint and award in cross-action for damages and penalties under California unfair debt collection practices act. Decision held California's litigation privilege inapplicable to judicial torts under Rosenthal Act.

Debt-buyer sued attorney and her client alleging liability on a medical debt assigned to plaintiff debt-buyer. Debt buyer sued in improper venue. After transfer to correct venue, defendants obtained ... summary judgment against complaint. Then, the attorney-defendant went to trial on her cross-complaint and established the debt-buyer had knowingly violated the Rosenthal Act prohibitions against distant venue abuse in the collection of consumer debts. The defendants and cross-claimants were awarded attorneys' fees.

Charles Quentin Jakob's Legal Cases (6)

Gilman v. Dalby, 61 Cal. App. 5th 923 (2021)

Phillips v. Gilman, 887 F.3d 956 (9th Cir. 2018)

2016 WL 8115713 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2016)

In re Gilman, 544 B.R. 184 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2016)

In re Microsoft I-V Cases, 135 Cal. App. 4th 706 (2006)

27 Trials Digest 11th 5 (July 7, 2008)