Legal Opinion
Peregrine Funding, Inc. v. Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 19, 2005No. A104481PublishedCited by 143 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McGUINESS, P. J.
This case is one of several arising from the collapse of a large Ponzi scheme. Plaintiffs—investors who lost millions in the scheme and a bankruptcy trustee representing entities that were used to perpetrate the scheme—have sued the law firm Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP (Sheppard), claiming its negligence and affirmative misconduct helped the perpetrators of the scheme avoid detection and prosecution by securities regulators. Sheppard filed a special motion to strike the complaint under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, subdivision (b)(1), 2 which…
2Cases cited54 opinions
- Navellier v. SlettenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
- Bank of Marin v. EnglandSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & OpportunityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Jolly v. Eli Lilly & Co.California Supreme Court · 1988
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by143 opinions
- Baral v. SchnittCalifornia Supreme Court · 2016
- Wong v. JingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Kearney v. Foley & Lardner, LLPCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Mindys Cosmetics, Inc. v. DakarCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Wallace v. McCubbinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
138 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.