Cordier v. Tkach
Filed 8/22/06 Cordier v. Tkach CA2/7
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION SEVEN
| DAVID A. CORDIER, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHN A. TKACH et al., Defendants and Appellants. | B179095 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. EC033305) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Zaven V. Sinanian, Judge. Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
McMillan & Tkach and John A. Tkach in propria persona for Appellants McMillan & Tkach and John A. Tkach.
Dunn Koes, Pamela E. Dunn and Daniel J. Koes for Appellant R. Wayne McMillan.
David A. Cordier, in propria persona, for Respondent.
Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland and Robert A. Olson for Amicus Curiae Association of Southern California Defense Counsel.
_______________________
The law firm of McMillan & Tkach and its two partners, R. Wayne McMillan and John A Tkach, appeal from a judgment in favor of attorney David Cordier for legal fees and costs in representing the firm and its partners in fee litigation with a former client of the partnership. We affirm the judgment as to the law firm and Tkach. We reverse as to McMillan.
FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW
McMillan and Tkach formed a general partnership in 1988 under the name McMillan and Tkach. (Hereafter McMillan & Tkach or the firm.)
In 1994, while McMillan & Tkach was still a general partnership, James Wasmund retained Tkach to bring an action to recover money and property wrongfully obtained from a corporation in which Wasmund was the major shareholder. Tkach obtained a recovery for Wasmund.
A dispute then arose between Tkach and Wasmund over the amount of fees due Tkach for his legal services. At about the same time this fee dispute arose McMillan & Tkach converted their general partnership into a limited liability partnership.[1] Thereafter Tkach, on behalf of himself and the firm, sued Wasmund for recovery of attorneys fees and Wasmund sued Tkach and the firm for malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty among other things. (We will refer to these suits as the Wasmund litigation.) McMillan was not named as an individual plaintiff or defendant in the Wasmund litigation.[2]
It is undisputed that in August 1998, while the Wasmund litigation was pending, Tkach discharged the attorney who had been representing him and the firm and instead retained Cordier. The Wasmund litigation went to a five day jury trial. Cordier obtained a verdict for Tkach and the firm in a net amount of $226,000 plus costs and prejudgment interest. The jury awarded Wasmund one dollar on his claim for breach of fiduciary duty and cancelled a trust deed securing Tkach's fee. The trial court did not award contractual attorneys fees for the litigation to either party because it determined neither party â€
