Walsworth Attorneys Leverage Case Through Closing Arguments to Obtain Dismissals for Firm Clients

Founding partner, Jeffrey P. Walsworth and partner, Elizabeth L. Huynh successfully extricated Firm clients from a business litigation matter after almost two months of trial. The pair had delivered their respective closing arguments and fully submitted the case to the Court when the plaintiffs, a technology solutions company and its CEO, folded. Specifically, moments before the Court was to deliver its verdict, the plaintiffs offered to dismiss their case with prejudice in exchange for mutual releases that did not involve monetary payment of any kind.

Prior to the offer, the plaintiffs had staunchly maintained that they were entitled to over $6 million in damages. They had claimed that the Firm clients, a former high-end custom home audio-visual integration company, its former President, and a related consulting company, were in breach of a contractual covenant not to compete, and liable for fraud, defamation, interference with contract, and interference with prospective economic opportunities, among other torts.

The Walsworth attorneys were able to successfully show the Court precisely why the plaintiffs’ case lacked merit. They did so by vigorously cross-examining each of the plaintiffs’ many purported witnesses to expose their lack of relevant knowledge and biases, and by presenting affirmative evidence that showcased the clients’ virtues in contrast to the plaintiffs. The defense presentation effectively led the Court to grant a mid-trial motion for judgment in the defense’s favor on the fraud claim and to aptly remark that the plaintiffs’ case seemed to be no more than a “spite lawsuit.”

Leading up to the trial, the litigation was highly contentious and arduous, with each side going to the mat in complicated discovery disputes that included intricate tax and e-discovery issues. The matter was venued in the Superior Court of California, County of Orange.