Innovative & Successful Trial Attorneys
At Matheny Sears Linkert & Jaime, LLP we take pride in our reputation as innovative and successful trial attorneys with decades of litigation experience. We are trial attorneys who actually try cases. The three named partners have been elected as members of the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA) and many of our other attorneys have first-chaired their own trials. We have earned a statewide reputation for
effective defense strategies that produce favorable resolutions, including dispositive motion and favorable settlements. If a case has to be tried, we are fully prepared to take the case to a jury-even on short notice and are proud of our track record.
Defending Catastrophic Exposure Cases Throughout California
We take pride in being a boutique trial firm capable of defending catastrophic exposure cases in a variety of scenarios that include personal injuries, products liability, transportation and trucking, premises liability, wildfire litigation, public entity (dangerous condition and sexual abuse), major construction defect cases, and employment litigation. Our ability to hold down damages using innovative litigation resolution strategies, effective dispositive motions, and trial spans the last 40 years. We are also proud of our record of defense verdicts in difficult cases.
Cases of Interest
Under Civil Code section 1717, subdivision (b)(2) and section 1811.1, defendants who allege in their answer that they tendered the amount owed to plaintiff prior to the commencement of litigation may be deemed the prevailing party.READ MORE
Ko v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc. (Dec. 23, 2020, No. B293672) ___Cal.App.5th___ [2020 Cal. App. LEXIS 1222]
Under a claim for NIED, virtual presence through a real-time audiovisual connection to a nanny cam satisfies the requirement that plaintiffs are contemporaneously and physically present at the injury-producing event.READ MORE
An operating agreement between a corporate entity and its shareholders that imposed contractual obligations on the shareholders is not sufficient to pierce of the corporate veil unless the shareholders exercised direct control over the corporation’s employees.READ MORE