ABOUT TRIAL LAWYER PATRICK J. D’ARCY

My name is Patrick J. D’Arcy. I am a trial attorney in Irvine, California, and opened my practice in 2010, after starting my career at a large law firm.  I graduated from Georgetown University Law Center in 2006, and focus on real estate, business litigation and defamation. If you are visiting my website, you might be in need of a lawyer, or, as many have told me, you find what I write entertaining. I am an unconventional writer (and a defender of the First Amendment), which contains my point of view, with a touch of humor sprinkled in. Nearly all of the law firms shy away from a website like mine. Such a pity. Lawyers don’t need to have websites that read like the back of a shampoo bottle.  Importantly, when selecting a lawyer, ask about their trial experience.  You are not looking for someone who talks “tough” but ultimately settles cases.  See if they have the experience listed below.  Incredibly, there are a fair percentage of self-proclaimed “trial lawyers” who work very hard to avoid trial.  Actual trial lawyers are not shy about posting their accomplishments.  Please keep in mind that no lawyer can guarantee a “win,” and each case must be decided by various factors, and my track record is not an assurance that I will win your case.  

Thank you for the trust you have placed in us. You can see more from “Client Testimonials” and “Successful Cases.” I have nearly 60 “5 star” reviews on Yelp, and over 50 “5 star” reviews on Google, 15 or more on Avvo, and other websites. My firm is an accredited business with the Better  Business Bureau, and has an “A+” rating.  Our victories got the attention of Super Lawyers, which named me a “Top Business Litigation Attorney” for the five consecutive years (2020-2024).  A Super Lawyers designation is difficult to achieve, since only 5% of attorneys are eligible to receive this award.  There are a lot of bullshit lawyer awards out there, but this one is coveted within the legal arena (and proudly displayed on the large law firm websites), and really Super!  This is just a few of the firm’s highlights.  See more in our “Successful Cases” tab.

October 19, 2023 – the California Supreme Court was petitioned (for the second time) in my defamation case against a troll.  His lawyer filed the petition after having lost yet again in the appellate court, and having lost on a motion for reconsideration.  Well, the High Court reviewed their petition, and my stinging brief.  I enjoyed very much reading a two word response from the High Court: “Petition Denied.”  In July 2023, I received news that I won (again) in my defamation case against persons that chose to make the brilliant decision to defame a trial lawyer online.  Not only did I defeat both of their anti-SLAPP motions, but I defeated the appeal, watched the case go to the California Supreme Court, where it was sent back for further review (due to a change in the law), and where I once again argued and briefed the matter, and defeated the appeal for a second straight time.  Yeah, defaming people can result in years of litigation.

August 2023: Property owner filed a bankruptcy petition to “save” their home, after having refused all offers to sell it and failing to make any payments for nearly a year.  I then had their bankruptcy petition deemed a “bad-faith” filing, and then had the Bankruptcy Court approve our motion for relief from stay and allowed the property to be foreclosed.  All of this could have been avoided if they would have simply cooperated.  But some people like living in their homes for free.

In June 2023, I defeated an emergency ex parte application to enjoin the foreclosure of an estate home.  I had no time to prepare any formal opposition.  I found out the hearing location 27 minutes before it was to start.  I called the court from my car, and with a verbal opposition successfully defeated the application.  This led to a defeat of the writ of mandate filed by the litigant as well.   The plaintiff filed yet another ex parte application, and I defeated that too.  We are on the cusp of now dismissing the case, with briefing on July 16, 2025. 

In May 2023, my motion to dismiss a lawsuit involving four property owners and 36 easement claims was granted, on the grounds of the failure to join indispensable parties.  This was a complicated motion that ended the case completely by discussing the application of venue and jurisdiction and sovereignty to this case.   By filing malpractice declarations, the case proceeded, and went to trial on February 2025.  We are now in final briefing.  

In 2022, I along with co-counsel, obtained a reversal of a 23 page decision in Complex Court, worth upwards of $10 to $14 million involving elder abuse, fiduciary fraud and other claims. 

In 2019, I was recognized by TopVerdict with a jury verdict that ranked 37th in Los Angeles County for 2019, including a damage award of $3,691,482. I represented 22 plaintiffs in a complex stock fraud case. Overall, it was the 83rd largest verdict in all of California.

EDUCATION

Juris Doctor, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, D.C. (2006) While enrolled at Georgetown’s Law School, I also took a course at Georgetown’s nationally ranked McDonough School of Business, and received an “A” grade regarding business strategy and fundamentals.

ADMISSIONS

All State courts within California U.S. District Court for the Northern, Southern, Central and Eastern Districts U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

PROFESSIONAL LICENSES

Mr. D’Arcy is a member of the State Bar of California, under license number 250174.  Mr. D’Arcy is also a licensed by the California Department of Real Estate as a Real Estate Broker, under license number 01856828.  Mr. D’Arcy has held more than 30 state licenses in the Title Insurance Industry, including escrow and title producer licenses, and pioneered the RESPA compliant shared services company in 1997.

VICTORIES IN COMPLEX COURT

“Complex Court” is where the very time-consuming and complicated cases wind up, so as to avoid jamming the local trial courts even more.  

On February 23, 2022, in Complex Court, I, along with my co-counsel, obtained an impressive and decisive win that will be among the largest in California in 2022. This lawsuit wrapped up five other lawsuits into one big mess. Given the size of the estate, our client was forced to defend millions in claims. There was a probate action involving feuding siblings, a defamation action (where I defeated the anti-SLAPP and  appeal), a quiet title action, and other petitions. The case had over 4,400 exhibits!  The client dismissed his previous attorneys, and hired me and my co-counsel to handle “phase 2.” The phase 2 trial lasted 17 days.  I was tasked with the cross-examination of the main witness.  We reversed findings of financial elder abuse, undue influence, breach of fiduciary duty, and potential attorney’s fees.  

In 2019, I became lead plaintiffs’ counsel in a major lawsuit moved to Complex Court in Alameda County,  involving potentially 16 or more parcels of land and being litigated by six law firms.  The hillside parcels never got fully developed, went into foreclosure, and resulted in claims against the fund control company, the owners, the contractor and construction lenders.   With some major elbow grease, I defeated a motion for summary adjudication, and defeated the fund control’s request for indemnification.  We also defeated a motion for dismissal as to one defendant, which they appealed (and lost again). The case has now finally resolved through a multi-party settlement.

In 2014, in Complex Court in Orange County, I, along with Jones Day, defeated a class action from ever forming, defeated the appeal of that ruling, and appeared at trial only to find that the plaintiffs had dismissed the case that morning. We refused settling for $100. That case was profiled in Law360.  We also defeated the appeal of the Court’s ruling denying the motion to certify the class.

RECENT TRIAL COURT VICTORIES

On September 21, 2022, in downtown Los Angeles, I defended a lender, and its officers, investors and employees against a plaintiff seeking to rescind and cancel the loan. The plaintiff never once made a payment after it funded, and now claimed “undue influence,” “fraud,” “deceptive practices,” “predatory lending” and host of other bogus claims.  By the time of trial, I had 17 of the 20 claims dismissed, and 14 of 16 defendants.  We went to trial on the remaining three claims and two defendants.  We attacked their expert – a head of psychology – who testified that the borrower “lacked capacity” to understand what he was doing.  During the first day of trial, he did a good job for the plaintiff. By the second day, we figured him out, and “got” him. The judge was then asked to dismiss the case through a motion called a “631.8,” where you argue to the court that the plaintiff did not prove its case.  The court granted the motion and dismissed the case so that my clients didn’t have put on their defense!  What an awesome win!  

On May 18, 2021, I concluded a bench trial where I defended a corporation against a nearly $200K monetary claim from a person claiming to have lent money to the site. This was a home in the Real Housewives of Orange County. There were more than 150 exhibits. We defeated the conversion claim before trial, got the deceptive business practices claim dismissed at trial, and the remaining two claims defeated at the close of evidence. For good measure, I also got dismissed the plaintiff’s two fraud claims against another defendant. I like to be thorough. Counting attorney’s fees on both sides, this was about a $400K case.  On the real estate side, this case had very interesting facts, and allowed us to show off our knowledge in this area. For instance, when one of the defendants recorded the deed of trust, the Judge agreed with us it was to “cloud” the title, as they no longer had title to encumber. We then provided the case authority showing such an act to be a felony.

I represented a lender where a borrower brought a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) to halt the foreclosure. I defeated the TRO, only for him to bring another, which I defeated again. Then, I had him dismiss his lawsuit, all within the span of a few months. We’ve defeated so many injunctions that it is rare for us to lose one.

I get an adrenaline rush (as do most lawyers) when facing an emergency temporary restraining order (“TRO”) or preliminary injunction. For one lender, the borrower brought two TRO’s to halt the foreclosure, and we defeated them both. We then got him to dismiss his lawsuit. All of this happened before the case could even get off the ground.

Also in May 2021, I defended a $1,500 claim. Yes, you read that right! My client was renting a high-end apartment and wanted the remainder of her $1,500 deposit back. The landlord made up an excuse to keep it. So, my client sued the landlord in small claims, and lost. In a case where it was really about the “principle” (and not the principal), she appealed the loss, and had me handle the case before Judge Nathan Scott. The landlord similarly “lawyered up.” The attorney and her client were arrogant. No matter. We defeated them. What I found particularly strange was the level of disrespect hurled at me simply when I introduced myself before the trial started. This lawyer acted like he was “the shit.” It was all a bluff. He didn’t really know the evidence code too well. When I started hurling objections at him, his eyes started “darting” and he lost his focus. He was a smart guy, but a smart ass too. He figured he’d blow us out of the water in arguing the landlord (which was the husband) was the party to be sued. My client had sued the wife. Arguing that my client named the wrong party, I quickly fixed this “problem.” I put the wife on the stand, and got her to admit she commingles these funds into a joint account with her husband, declares rental income on a joint Schedule E with her 1040, and that she is a joint owner of the house. What a stupid defense. They got nothing. Even though my client spent more than $1,500 to end this saga, she just couldn’t allow someone to prevail like that. Justice comes in all shapes and sizes.

NOTABLE WINS IN FEDERAL COURT

In July 2021, I was called to defend a lender and foreclosure company concerning a Los Angeles downtown hotel against a bullshit lawsuit filed by an arrogant and newly minted lawyer. I worked alongside another outstanding lawyer, who defended the owner. Together, we filed devastating Rule 12 challenges to all of the causes of action, and the federal judge issued a ruling dismissing the case after just one pleading! Case over.

I defeated a federal lawsuit over a commercial lease, with the case published as binding authority in the Ninth Circuit.  After a blistering attack with Rule 12 motions, we got the owners out (they were franchisees of Burger King), dismissed all but two claims against their company with further pleading attacks, and then last two claims were tossed on summary judgment.

I represented a metal recycling company in federal court, and got the multi-million case moved from the Orange County Central Justice Center to federal court, and then had the case dismissed within a few months of it being filed.

MAJOR CASES WON IN ARBITRATION

On September 27, 2021, I concluded a hard-fought real estate dispute involving a large mansion that was foreclosed upon. I represented the lender, its employees, a mortgage broker and the investors. The borrowers demanded $1 million, and made allegations of “financial elder abuse,” “breach of fiduciary duty,” “wrongful foreclosure,” “rescission,” 17200 and others.  Collectively, 132 claims were brought against my client.  We had 84 claims dismissed by way of dispositive motion, which must be some kind of record, and went to trial on the remaining claims.  Over 450 exhibits were prepared for trial, and two experts. We defeated every claim at trial.  The plaintiffs received nothing but heavy legal fees, even we tried to get them to walk-away. The arbitrator found that my clients did nothing wrong.

In 2020, I, and co-counsel defended a highly successful real estate broker against millions in claims against his businesses, including claims of fiduciary fraud, breach of trust and other claims.  This case was a “long-cause” case before the Probate Department, and had over 600 exhibits. I was tasked with defending the real estate holdings, the businesses, and the investments of the client, all of which was under attack and claimed to be trust assets.  I filed a devastating motion in limine to challenge the admissibility of the evidence, and asserted statute of limitations defenses.  After ten days of hearings, the arbitrator suggested that the case be settled.   The motion I filed was not ruled upon until the retired Judge had an opportunity to evaluate the evidence, as the case was assigned to him after being in the Probate Department for more than four years.  I asked for a ruling to now exclude the evidence, after getting key admissions from the petitioner that sued our client.  The retired Judge took it under advisement, and then – out of fear of an adverse ruling – the petitioner settled on terms highly favorable to our client, and protected all of his holdings.  This was a bitterly fought case, and I will always remember my client’s call to me the following morning, thanking me for the hard work to allow him to move on with his life.  

DEFAMATION VICTORIES AT THE TRIAL AND APPELLATE COURT LEVEL

On September 14, 2021, I concluded a trial representing two corporations and its owner in a defamation case brought against a person who posted a Yelp review. We requested that the Yelp review be taken down, so as to avoid litigation. The person refused. We defeated their attempt to file a late anti-slapp, defeated their attempt to have four motions to compel heard, and obtained a six figure judgment at trial while defeating all of their counterclaims.   

On January 22, 2021, I got another New Year’s present: I was brought in to assist in writing the appellate brief for a large defamation case involving two appeals of anti-slapp motions in Los Angeles county. We not only prevailed, but reversed the award requiring our client to pay attorney’s fees, reinstated the dismissed causes of action, and recovered our costs. The lawsuit was about a Twitter account that claimed a “parody” or “humor” defense for what was written. They appealed again to the California Supreme Court, and their petition was denied.

On April 24, 2020, in another defamation case, I drafted the appellate briefs and argued the matter before the Appellate Court, which unanimously upheld my defeat of an anti-SLAPP motion.

On March 21, 2019, I argued a libel case before the Court of Appeal, supported by my appellate brief.  I previously defeated an anti-SLAPP motion that the defendant filed in the defamation case.  So, they appealed, and lost again. The Court of Appeal largely used my citations and unanimously upheld my defeat of the anti-SLAPP motion, and defeated an “appellate specialist” in the process.

When I was being defamed online, I spent the time and effort to uncover their identities and then sued six of them. I defeated the anti-slapp motion (a motion brought by a defendant seeking dismissal of the case on First Amendment grounds) by one defendant,  and defeated the other anti-slapp by another defendant. I defeated the appeal after arguing the matter before the  Court of Appeal. My appellate brief was so powerful that the Appellate Court not only denied the anti-slapp motion, but said that the defendant didn’t warrant any anti-slapp protection at all. The defendant sought review, which was denied, and then appealed to the California Supreme Court, which agreed to reverse (or vacate) the Appellate Court’s decision in light of the change in defamation law.  The matter was sent back to the Appellate Court, where I defeated the appeal yet again.

Record Setting Jury Verdict In A Stock Fraud Case In Downtown Los Angeles

On October 23, 2018, and after a two-week jury trial in downtown Los Angeles, I obtained a $3.8 million jury verdict (including $1.4 million in punitive damages) on a complicated stock fraud case where I represented 22 plaintiffs.  This was a hard-fought case where I did the direct and cross-examination of 28 witnesses.  I got the defense’s “expert” on stock fraud to admit on the stand that my clients were defrauded, which proved the first claim of our case, “fraud.”  That was pretty hilarious.  One of our other claims was against the company that hired the defendant.  We sued the company for negligent supervision and prevailed to the tune of $723K.   We settled with other defendants for $515K more, meaning the total recovery is north of $4.3 million.  This verdict ranks in the top 83rd according to “Top Verdict 100” in all of California for 2019. The firm successfully defended its trial verdict by defeating all post trial motions, including a motion to offset the judgment against a prior settlement, a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and a motion for a new trial.  We then defeated the appeal.

Complete Dismissal Of A Three-Strikes Case And Two Gun Charges

I no longer take these cases, but this one definitely makes my list for personal satisfaction.  I was on my way to a Sunday birthday celebration when I got immediate successive calls from a client that his son was in jail and had just been arrested. There were five charges, including three of them being “strike” felonies, and two gun charges. Think about California’s “Three Strikes Law,” and having three of them in one case. An ex-girlfriend and two of her friends made up all types of bullshit against him. He had never been in trouble before, but was facing possibly thirty years in prison. As Al Pacino said in The Devil’s Advocate, “Kevin (played by Keanu Reeves)…Kevin…we talked about this….Remember?… Pressure? Take a big whiff!” (For those thinking of becoming a lawyer, you better get comfortable with shit like this). As people sang “Happy Birthday” to me, my mind was racing. I blew out the candles, quickly disappeared, and made calls and started looking at what had been filed on line, since the father was only getting bits of information. Now, I normally don’t take criminal cases anymore (even though I was a DA at one time). This one was different – the “client” was also a close friend of mine. Well, I turned the tables on the “victims” and sued them. I then put one of them on the stand. When I started my cross-examination, she was smirking and smiling at me, and literally enjoying her moment in the hot seat. Evil personified. She was also arrogant as hell. Within one hour, I had her admit that she forged government documents, that her boyfriend (the other “victim”) had as well, and so destroyed her on the stand that the judge threatened to have charges brought against her and the other clowns. The case was then dismissed. The DA was great and really fair. Because I was dealing with a narcissistic liar, I made sure to bring a court reporter to take down everything she said. I got that smirk wiped off her face. Confronted with the felonies she now admitted to, and that her story didn’t match anything she told the police, she busted out crying, followed by catatonic blank stares. Her look of horror was in stark contrast to the arrogant person who dared me to question her. Justice served. That was a very high stakes case for the son – his entire future was hanging over his head because of an evil ex-girlfriend who wanted others to lie for her. This case will always be personally satisfying to me and rank among the best cross-examinations of my entire career. Getting an innocent person their life back makes the hard work and stress worth it to me. When the spotlight was at its brightest, and I only had one shot to get this evil person, I was able to get to the truth and end this horrible saga.

MAJOR SETTLEMENTS

I was particularly happy with the victory we obtained for a paint distributor, who wanted out of his franchise contract with a South African company. We eventually settled the case where all of my client’s money – over several hundred thousand dollars – was returned so that he walked away, and the manufacturer was now the owner of the store. I drafted all of the settlement contracts, real estate documents and escrow instructions.

I represented a very large painting contractor, and obtained a $1.3 million settlement.

I obtained City of Los Angeles approval that took a private road into the Beverly Hills Post Office, and allowed it to under city control, thus paving the way for the construction of a $25 million home.

I went to trial against the Los Angeles County Assessment Appeals Board over a tax assessment for raw land in the Beverly Hills Post Office, after they refused to lower the tax assessments.  I not only obtained a victory in that case, but they County refused to go to trial against me specifically unless the County was represented by its own counsel, after its lead investigator said I was “the best real estate lawyer he had ever met.”  The trial saved my client tens of thousands of dollars in taxes.

REAL ESTATE EXPERT WITNESS

I am also an expert witness for real estate matters involving DRE licensed salespersons/brokers and title insurance. In Complex Court, a bitter real estate feud lasted six years. There were over 20 experts on one side alone. I was called in to give an opinion on whether the broker breached its duties. My testimony was instrumental in winning the case.

I was also called to testify in a hard-fought real estate dispute regarding title to a building.

APPEALS

In a defamation action, I defeated both anti-SLAPP motions, and on April 24, 2020, the Appellate Court unanimously upheld my anti-SLAPP win.  I briefed and argued the matter before the Court of Appeal.  One defendant has now appealed (again) to the California Supreme Court.  The matter was sent back to the Appellate Court in light of the Geiser decision, and I prevailed again in defeating the appeal for a second time.  I then defeated the petition before the High Court sending the matter back to the trial court. 

I was brought in to handle two appeals of anti-slapp motions in a defamation case.  I wrote major portions of the appellate briefs.  The Appellate Court found for my client on all counts, reversed the dismissal of the causes of action, reversed the awarding of attorney’s fees at the trial court, and found that there was no anti-slapp protection at all.

I brought a defamation action for a CEO, and the defendant responded with an anti-SLAPP motion.  I defeated the anti-SLAPP motion (a motion that argues that the defamation lawsuit infringes on a person’s First Amendment rights).  The defendant hired an “appellate specialist,” and appealed the trial court’s ruling.  The Court of Appeal unanimously agreed with me and defeated the appeal.

I, along with only my co-counsel, Paul Rafferty of Jones Day, not only defeated a class action before it could be certified, but unanimously defeated an appeal of the trial court’s ruling.  Chavos & Rau v. ProCourier (2010) 30-2010-00397235.

I unanimously defeated an appeal of a 12-0 jury verdict before the Appellate Department in Los Angeles.  (2016) Sainz v. Leiva.  14U113246

I defeated an anti-SLAPP motion in a defamation case and then defeated the appeal as well.

Mr. D’Arcy appealed a demurrer sustained without leave to amend in Complex Court.  (2012) [CASE CONFIDENTIAL].  The appeal was so powerful that it led to settlements with various defendants.  In that case, Mr. D’Arcy also obtained a court order shutting down the disbursement of contractor funds on a public works project.

PUBLISHED FEDERAL OPINION REGARDING BURGER KING FRANCHISEES AND LEASES

Mr. D’Arcy’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion in San Diego federal court was published for decision.  In that motion, Mr. D’Arcy dismissed both individual defendants (two former CEOs of Burger King franchises), and eliminated all but two other claims against the lone defendant.  Later, after the plaintiffs tried to file a motion for summary judgment to “win” the case, Mr. D’Arcy not only defeated the motion, but had the federal judge dismiss the case too!  Rex Investment v. S.M.E., et al. (2015) 3:15-cv-02607.

In federal court in Los Angeles regarding a hotel, I had a lengthy lawsuit entirely dismissed through a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.

I moved a case to federal court involving the alleged theft of millions of dollars in overseas shipments, and then obtained a dismissal of the lawsuit before discovery could begin.

LAWYERS AND SEE’S CANDIES

Lawyers are like a box of See’s candies – we come in all shapes and sizes, with varying backgrounds. People choose lawyers like they do a box of See’s candy. Only after they hired the lawyer (just like when they bite into a candy that defies description) do they realize whether or not they have made the right decision. You need to make the right decision upfront. When I opened my own firm in 2010, I had already worked five years at “big law” (Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton), so I copied what I learned. Hiring lawyers who worked at “big law” is usually a safe bet – only the top students from the top schools get chosen for these jobs. Unsurprisingly, there’s a lot of competition for these high paying jobs that start at $190K per year. Big law firms are picky – they eliminate just about everyone from consideration. After extensive filtering, the lawyers picked to work at big law are, if you will, the high-end chocolates. In your search for a lawyer, finding those who already made it through the screening process to get a coveted big law job is a good start. 

YOU WON’T PAY FOR ON THE JOB TRAINING WITH MY FIRM

Most lawyers went straight to law school after earning a liberal arts degree. With zero background experience in anything, they really can’t advise you at all. So, they trot down the hall to a partner who hopefully can give them the answer. Under that model, you pay twice: once for the associate to learn what it is he is supposed to know, and a higher rate for the partner to tell the associate about it. Happily, I don’t take cases unless I really know the subject matter.  

Beware Of “Litigators” Who Don’t Litigate.

Texans have a saying I am fond of: “Big Hat!  Not Cattle!”  Beware of “tough talking” lawyers claiming to be “litigators.”  It might be a bluff.  When seeking a lawyer, make sure they have a lot of energy, intelligence and are not afraid to go to trial. A lawyer with a lot of energy and no intelligence, well, that sucks! A lawyer with a lot of intelligence and no energy is pretty bad too. A lawyer who is smart, has high energy and is afraid to go to trial is probably worst of all. The hallmark of a litigator is actually trying cases in front of a jury. A large percentage of “litigators” rarely set foot in the courtroom. They talk tough, and are afraid to go to trial. Avoid them. Ask them about their trial experience. If you get silence or evasion, or some long-winded answer that gyrates, move along. Hell, I handled four trials in four months, and two trials in one month!

Develop The Mindset That You Are In A War Decided By Paper And Words.

Litigation is fighting. While the “fighting” doesn’t entail guns and knives, it is still a “fight.” Someone has to win. This isn’t a collaborative effort, but a zero sum game where the object is money, property, and vindication (or retribution). We can go up against anyone – and we have. We have taken down the largest law firms. Big law firms like to use their size to intimidate the small shops. Lawyers at big law notice the smallest details – such as our address, the school I attended, my stationery (the highest quality), custom-made plastic paper clips (which are costly), etc. It may sound funny to say that lawyers pay attention to whether another lawyer (me) spends the extra bucks for custom-made paper clips. However, the best lawyers pay attention to small details. When a small, boutique firm uses the same expensive stuff that Biglaw uses, the Biglaw lawyers realize we are just as equipped as them to fight. They also realize we not only can fight back, but we have resources. It changes the landscape from a negotiating and posturing perspective. When I see lawyers with half-ass, sloppy papers held together with rusty paper clips, I think I am going to beat them just from the inattention alone or that their client lacks money to even fight me. Believe me when I tell you that lawyers engage in these ritualistic games, and it has an influence on how one adversary views the other.

Does Your Lawyer’s Office Door Have A Name Plate On It? If You Pull Back The Name Plate, Does It Faintly State “Men’s Restroom”?

The money your lawyer spends on the office and machinery ought to mirror the big law model. Lawyers that cut corners on cost do so for a reason. It also makes them vulnerable to lawyers like me who spend the extra money to have superior research tools and equipment. Just as with big law, we are in the finest buildings in Irvine (the Jamboree Center), we use the same top-end Xerox high speed copiers, printers and scanners, work from custom-built computers, a network backed up off-site through servers, have a library stacked with the best resources, as well as Lexis-Nexis for all legal research. In other words, what Sheppard Mullin uses to arm its lawyers with, I use. Most lawyers – and especially the small shops – do not spend this kind of money. And it shows.

Working As A Deputy District Attorney In Orange County

After big law, I joined the Orange County District Attorney, and worked as a prosecutor. That was a cool job. I progressed rapidly, was already handling felony cases in just a few months, and even took two criminal jury trials in one month. The DA’s office gave me a “Tough Prosecutor” award. I love that award. Handling two criminal jury trials in one month is a hard thing to do. Since real estate is a heavy part of my life, I know a lot about it. Brokerage houses like Sotheby’s in the “platinum triangle” list me as their preferred attorney. I have been involved in real estate deals larger than $1 billion, have closed thousands of real estate deals, whether it involved selling off airspace rights over a highrise, helping a government agency condemn land for airport expansion, getting a tract map recorded for land development, and everything else. On the business side, my background was as an executive before becoming a lawyer, so I handle a lot of business disputes too. I In a more recent federal case, I got the CEO’s and its corporation dismissed from a lawsuit with no payments made, with the opinion published by the Ninth Circuit as binding authority on real estate leases.

President Of The Orange County Indigent Defense Panel

For about eight years, I volunteered my time for Orange County’s poorest residents at the Orange County Indigent Defense Panel, an organization that had about twenty lawyers and operated for about 35 years. We represented those who did not qualify for a public defender, yet too poor to afford to pay a lawyer the standard rates. The poor in our community – which consisted mainly of ethnic minorities, the elderly, disabled and homeless, would be without representation, and at the mercy of the justice system. Having a lawyer stand up for them meant everything. In a busy courtroom, you find a person who is broke, scared, and feeling all alone and intimidated. One case I took for free involved a single mother of two children facing mandatory jail time for “violating” a restraining order. The person who got the restraining order was the new girlfriend of the now ex-husband. My client – who was only 19 – was only trying to pick up her kids at night. The girlfriend made up some story, the police arrived, and took my client to jail. Even the police officer felt sorry for my client, but told her that he had to arrest her. The basis for the restraining order was bullshit. I attacked the “victim’s” story in court, got the restraining order ended, and then got the case against my client dismissed just before the jury was being selected. That’s justice! When this organization offered its services, you could see the hope in their eyes as a lawyer was now arguing on their behalf, and negotiating down the charges (or getting them dismissed). To me, this has always been one of the most valuable ways I used my law degree: “Excuse me, your Honor. Would the Court inquire if this defendant would allow me to represent her free of charge?” Imagine standing before the Judge, with nobody to help you, no money to fight the case, and your freedom on the line. I was the newest member of the organization, yet the founder selected me to become its president and to manage its affairs. I would go to the courthouses and represent many persons without charge, and argue their cases to the DA and judge. The mission of this great organization was to bring legal representation to the working poor, and it did marvelous work. If you have read this far (and good for you by the way), change society by getting off your ass and do something positive for your fellow citizens.

PRO BONO MATTERS

Mr. D’Arcy was president of the Orange County Quasi-Indigent Defense Panel, a organization of approximately 20+ attorneys that helped the poor with free to low-cost legal representation. In 2008, on behalf of the Public Law Center in Orange County, Mr. D’Arcy represented an elderly woman scammed out of her savings by a dishonest plumber.  The plumber left the home in disrepair, with no heat or running water, forcing the elderly woman to try and cook food from a home-made stove. The HOA refused to do anything.   Mr. D’Arcy threatened to sue the plumber for all types of damages, including elder abuse. The plumber settled in 37 minutes, and went back and fixed everything at no cost.  The HOA also waived all costs and fixed all the problems with her unit.  This was one of the fastest settlements in PLC’s history. This case was profiled on video for two consecutive fundraising dinners at the PLC charity banquet, which is attended by upwards of 1,000 persons in Orange County. In 2010, Mr. D’Arcy received the Wiley M. Manuel Certificate by the California State Bar, due to his aggressive multi-count real estate fraud claim against a real estate broker who defrauded indigent clients. In 2012, Mr. D’Arcy represented two indigent clients (a brother and sister) for free before the US Bankruptcy Court in Los Angeles, and successfully opposed the trustee’s plan to sell their home to pay off their debts.  The clients were both mentally disabled, and one was committed to a mental hospital.   The brother incorrectly believed he no longer owned the home provided by his mother, and lived on the streets.  After a contested hearing, the trustee withdrew the plan and the client’s kept their home.