Legal Opinion

Plummer v. Day/Eisenberg, LLP

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 26, 2010No. G041512PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

IKOLA, J.

Plaintiff Mark B. Plummer, an attorney, appeals from a judgment entered after the court granted summary judgment to defendant Day/Eisenberg, LLP, a law firm. Plummer alleged Day/Eisenberg converted or interfered with settlement funds recovered in a personal injury action handled by Plummer, Day/Eisenberg, and another law firm, Bisom & Cohen. The court granted summary judgment because it found Plummer had no direct contractual relationship with the clients and thus lacked an immediate right to possess the settlement funds.

We reverse the judgment and remand. Triable issues exist…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.California Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Saelzler v. Advanced Group 400California Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Fracasse v. BrentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Farmers Ins. Exchange v. ZerinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Fair v. BakhtiariCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  2. Lanz v. GoldstoneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
  3. United Energy Trading, LLC v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2016
  4. CRV Imperial-Worthington, LP v. Gemini InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2010
  5. Popovich v. WeingartenDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2011

17 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