California Court of Appeal

In a legal malpractice action arising from petitioners' concurrent representation of four clients as co-plaintiffs in an insurance coverage action, petition for writ of mandate challenging denial of motion of petitioners in this action seeking collateral estoppel is denied over claim that if an appellate court affirms a trial court decision based on one of two alternative grounds relied on by the trial court, all of the issues decided by the trial court in connection with either ground of decision are conclusively established and binding as collateral estoppel.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/18/2008
• Published 01/18/2008

Judges

• CROSKEY, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, James P. Fogelman, Sarah R. Wetzstein, Los Angeles, and J. Christopher Jennings, for Petitioners., Pillsbury WinthropShar Pittman, Robert L. Wallan, John M. Grenfell, Kimberly L. Buffington and Gevik M. Baghdassarian, Los Angeles, for Real Parties In Interest.


• For Appellees:
  
• No appearance for Respondent.