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
Degala v. John Stewart Co. 2023 DJDAR 1093
Where an owner/hirer affirmatively provides security measures in a high crime area and there are questions of fact as to the reasonableness of those measures, the Hooker exception to the Privette doctrine is applicable.
READ MORERamirez v. Avon Products, Inc. (2023) Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 20STCV22671 Case No. JCCP 4674
A declaration from a PMQ or corporate representative is still held to the same rules of evidence as a lay witness in assessing a declaration attached to an MSJ.
READ MORECole v. Superior Court of San Diego County No. D081299, 2022 WL 17999483 (Cal Ct. App. Dec. 30, 2022)
Since summary judgement motion was electronically filed and served 107 days or more before trial, it was timely, and the moving parties were entitled to a hearing on the motion.
READ MORE