Legal Opinion

Roldan v. Callahan & Blaine

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 27, 2013No. G047306PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

RYLAARSDAM, J.

Plaintiffs settled the underlying case reluctantly, and only after their attorneys—including defendants herein—unsuccessfully attempted to have them declared legally incompetent so that a guardian ad litem could be appointed to cooperate with the attorneys’ efforts. Plaintiffs subsequently elected to file suit against the attorneys based on that attempt, on the alleged inadequacy of the settlement, and on other conduct. Defendants Callahan and Blaine, Edward Susolik and Lee Burrows (collectively Callahan) successfully moved to compel arbitration of that suit, based on the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gutierrez v. Autowest, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
  2. Martin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Parada v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  4. Swenson v. FileCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Stewart v. Preston Pipeline Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2005

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Jameson v. DestaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
  2. Penilla v. Westmont Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2016
  3. Weiler v. Marcus & Millichap Real Estate Inv. Servs., Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  4. Han v. Hallberg, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  5. Aronow v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API