Saturday, October 1st, 2011
Ward & Hagen and San Francisco class action attorney Julio J. Ramos are pursuing a class action against a major California Bank. Employees of the bank allegedly helped facilitate a “ponzi scheme” that defrauded over 400 investors of not less than $23,000,000. The action is currently pending in Los Angeles Superior Court.
Wednesday, May 4th, 2011
A landscape architect and pool contractor retained Ward & Hagen when the million dollar landscape project they had been working on was cancelled by the owner of the home in Los Angeles County. The owner of the home, a well known professional athlete, denied that any contract existed and refused to acknowledge the work that was already complete. After taking several out of state depositions, a settlement for a confidential amount was reached.
Friday, October 1st, 2010
Attorneys at Ward & Hagen represented a family in Encinitas whose newly constructed single-family home was showing significant damage from soils movement. The family attempted to have the builder assess and fix the problem, but only saw delays as the damage to their home became more apparent. The builder and subcontractors were responsible for the rough grading of the half acre lot and expert testing showed the soils around the home were moving and would continue to do so for an indefinite period of time. A global settlement was reached for over $837,000 representing cost of repairs for extensive work to re-level the slab and foundations and to stabilize the underlying soils as well as to compensate the homeowners for loss of use of the home during the period of repairs.
Tuesday, June 1st, 2010
Attorneys at Ward & Hagen represented a family in Encinitas who had purchased a home, only to find significant water damage and mold in the ceiling and walls of their child’s bedroom. At mediation, the Defendants (Sellers and real estate agents) offered a combined $10,000. Upon further investigation/discovery, a prior occupant of the home was located who testified that the problems all predated the sale and all current damages could be linked to prior failed repair attempts. None of these prior problems had been disclosed by seller and directly contradicted the seller’s sworn deposition testimony. In the month prior to trial, the Defendants agreed to settle for a total of $215,000