Skip to main content

California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print


Trial court's refusal to enforce an agreement between attorney and client is affirmed as the evidence demonstrates that attorney's conduct was in violation of the California Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 3-300, and amounted to undue influence within the meaning of Probate Code section 16004.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 12/03/2003
  • Published 12/03/2003


  • EPSTEIN, Acting P.J.


  • California Court of Appeal


  • For Appellees:
  •  Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, James M. Harris, Thomas P. Hanrahan and Jill Faulker McNeal, Los Angeles, for Plaintiff, Appellant and Respondent Jerome Janger., Greenwald, Pauly, Foster & Miller, Andrew S. Pauly and Joshua D. Wayser, Santa Monica, for Plaintiffs, Appellants and Respondents BGJ Associates, LLC and Robert Goldman., Law Offices of Philip Kaufler and Philip Kaufler, Beverly Hills, for Defendants and Appellants Jeff Wilson and Wilco, LLC., Hillel Chodos and Deborah Chodos, Los Angeles, for Defendant and Respondent M2B2, LLC.,  Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, Steven G. Madison, James J. Webster and Naomi J. Harlin, Los Angeles, for Defendants and Respondents Linda Brittan and Roxbury Managers, Ltd.
Copied to clipboard