Commercial Litigation

Meyers Nave represented the City of Anaheim in pre-litigation proceedings to void the $320+ million sale of Angel Stadium to SRB Management (affiliated with Angels Baseball), citing violations of Government Code §1090. The firm prepared to challenge the deal on grounds that then-Mayor Harry Sidhu engaged in covert negotiations and shared confidential City information with the Angels in exchange for promised campaign contributions. These actions created a prohibited financial conflict of interest under §1090 while also involving issues of fraudulent concealment, ethics, and public trust. Mayor Sidhu later pled guilty to federal charges, including obstruction of justice, wire fraud, and making false statements, including deleting emails to impede a federal investigation and providing non-public information to help structure the deal favorably for the Angels while anticipating a $1 million campaign contribution. He was recently sentenced to two months in federal prison, one year of supervised release, and a $55,000 fine.

Defended a national bank, subsidiaries, and directors in multiple class actions and government suits in federal and state courts in New York, Massachusetts, California and Florida for securities, ERISA, breach of contract and other claims arising from Bernard L. Madoff Ponzi scheme, the largest to date.

Meyers Nave was instrumental in serving as outside counsel to the City of Sacramento with the development, in conjunction with its private partners, of the $535 million downtown arena for the Sacramento Kings NBA team, a fast-tracked project that reshaped the City and its downtown core. Meyers Nave advised the City on multiple legal and regulatory issues, including eminent domain and CEQA, and defeated every legal challenge attempted against the project, including allegations that the public-private partnership supporting the arena engaged in a “secret subsidy,” collusion, fraud, waste and illegal expenditure of public funds. The victory was recognized by the Daily Journal as a “Top Defense Result” in 2015.

Defended a mezzanine lender against loan-guaranty and loan-to-own claims involving a $1.5 billion real estate portfolio, winning summary judgment and a favorable settlement.

Represented the City in a complex contractual dispute over the operation of a natural gas pipeline through the City, prevailing in full at the Court of Appeal in a published decision, with review denied (California Resources Production Corp. v. Antioch City Council (2024) 107 Cal.App.5th 481).

Represented the County in federal litigation over a complex contractual dispute concerning a regionally critical solid-waste and recycling facility.

Prevailed at the trial court in a writ proceeding and a related declaratory relief action defending the City’s mobile home rent ordinance; the rulings are on appeal (as of August 2026).

Managed discovery and Public Records Act practice reaching more than 70 million documents, building the databases and search protocols that narrowed the set to fewer than 1 million while minimizing client cost.

Defended the City in federal litigation brought by AT&T and Verizon challenging its ordinance governing the siting of cellular facilities, winning dismissal of the action.

Defended the City in a class action challenging water rates under Proposition 218.

Authored an amicus brief on behalf of the League of California Cities, California State Association of Counties and American Planning Association California Chapter in a case involving the constitutionality of billboard regulations. In a major victory for municipalities throughout the state, the Second Appellate District overruled the lower court, preserving the ability of California cities and counties to continue using the onsite/offsite and commercial/noncommercial distinctions as a regulatory tool in their sign codes. Published decision: Lamar Central Outdoor, LLC v. City of Los Angeles (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 610.

Defense of large residential approvals against CEQA and planning law challenges, including a 2,393-unit residential and commercial project on 530 acres in Rancho Cordova, which produced the published decision California Native Plant Society v. City of Rancho Cordova (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 603; a 2,694-unit project on 1,926 acres in Desert Hot Springs raising CEQA and Subdivision Map Act claims; and Schellinger Brothers v. City of Sebastopol (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 1245, which clarified a lead agency’s right to complete adequate environmental review even where the process exceeds one year.

Obtained full acquittal after a six-week trial for a former CFO of a medical distribution company in connection with criminal securities fraud charges by the DOJ, arising out of $9 billion stock market capitalization loss following an earnings restatement. Also represented a former President of Countrywide Financial Corporation in connection with investigations by and litigation with the California Attorney General and the SEC, and related class actions.

Reviewed the EIR for CEQA compliance on a 1.9 million square foot commercial/residential development (including 650 homes and 150 hotel rooms). The proposed project consists of modifications and additions to the existing 29.85-acre South Bay Galleria enclosed mall property in the City of Redondo Beach. Related published decision: Walters et al. v. City of Redondo Beach (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 809.

Defended a microelectronics company in a four month trial in San Jose, California, obtaining a unanimous defense verdict, subsequently recognized as a “Top Defense Verdict of the Year.”

Represented six California cities that were sued for a refund of taxes by several individuals and New Cingular Wireless on behalf of individual Internet service users. New Cingular, which for several years had erroneously charged its customers taxes on Internet access and passed the proceeds onto the defendant local agencies, later filed administrative claims to have the taxes refunded. After the plaintiffs sued, several test demurrers were filed on the grounds that New Cingular and the individual plaintiffs lacked standing to litigate the matter. The trial court granted the cities’ demurrer, without leave to amend, as to all plaintiffs. On appeal, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s ruling as to the individual plaintiffs, but reversed and remanded the matter as to New Cingular. Our clients were the Cities of Desert Hot Springs, Downey, El Cerrito, Pasadena, Pinole and San Leandro.

Achieved a closely watched victory for the County of Los Angeles in a final ruling that awarded $6.6 million in attorneys’ fees, sanctions and civil penalties plus permanent injunctive relief in a case that involved the illegal transport and dumping of concrete and other construction debris in an ecologically sensitive region in the Santa Susana Mountains. Relying on drone surveillance and more than 500 exhibits, Meyers Nave initially obtained a preliminary injunction banning all Class 6 trucks and higher from the illegal waste disposal operation, along with additional restrictions including requiring defendant to post No Dumping signs and submit a conditional use permit and engineered grading application to address hillside stability issues. After granting our motion for summary judgment, the Court ordered briefing on the appropriate remedies. The Court’s subsequent ruling granted a permanent injunction banning Class 6 and higher trucks, the most effective deterrent for the County to halt the dumping and parades of trucks through the canyon. Civil penalties and attorneys’ fees were awarded in the amount of $6,638,192.33. For violating the County’s Zoning, Grading, and Building Codes, the Court assessed civil penalties of $4,893,000. For violating the state Unfair Competition Law, the Court assessed an additional penalty of $800,000. The Court also awarded the County $945,192.33 in attorneys’ fees.

Advising the County of Los Angeles on a new, master-planned community on Tejon Ranch in the unincorporated Los Angeles County to develop up to 19,333 dwelling units and up to 10 million square feet of commercial and business uses. The firm’s extensive services included review of the EIR; review and drafting of CEQA findings; all aspects of the entitlement process, including negotiating a project Development Agreement and affordable housing program; staff reports; and Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors resolutions. Subsequently defended the County in two lawsuits brought by three petitioners. The County was successful on numerous issues at trial, including all issues raised by the Center for Biological Diversity and the California Native Plant Society. Most relevant here was successfully convincing the trial court that the County’s EIR appropriately analyzed consistency with SCAG’s then-current RTP/SCS. Appeals and cross-appeals are currently pending in the Second District.
Ongoing defense of the County in Center for Biological Diversity, California Native Plant Society v. County of Los Angeles et al; Tejon Ranch Co., Centennial Founders, LLC, Tejon Ranchcorp (2021) Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Seven, Case No. B318083 against a CEQA and planning and zoning law challenge.

Meyers Nave settled the claim for Central Coast Community Energy after AES Redondo Beach walked away from its supply obligation, with more than $3 million in replacement costs at stake. 3CE had agreed to write the State Water Board in support of continued operation at the AES Redondo Beach plant, a facility under sustained opposition from Surfrider and other environmental groups, in exchange for a below-market price on backup resource adequacy supply. AES took the support. Then it refused the price.

Meyers Nave prevailed at the trial court in expedited CEQA litigation for this transit-oriented development project, including 950 apartments and condos, a 308-room hotel, and 190,000 square feet of commercial space, that will redevelop the iconic Crossroads of the World site in Hollywood. The project was certified as an ELDP (Environmental Leadership Development Project) under AB 900, entitling it to a compressed litigation schedule that requires resolving trial and appellate litigation in an expedited 270-day timeframe. The project preserves 1930s-era buildings where F. Scott Fitzgerald and Alfred Hitchcock worked, and remakes a prominent Hollywood site with new affordable housing and open space.

Meyers Nave serves as outside legal counsel for all environmental and land use matters for the City of Redondo Beach, a charter city. The engagement includes review and defense of land use planning documents and project-specific applications, including the Coastal Land Use Program, the Harbor/Pier Specific Plan, Coastal Zoning, initiative measures, and charter amendments, together with CEQA review and litigation defense of numerous EIRs, MNDs, and exemptions.

Meyers Nave serves as City Attorney to Sand City, a small, dynamic Monterey County city, advising the Council on governance, public-private partnership transactions, regulatory matters, and litigation with the State of California. As land use and special counsel, the firm has structured development agreements for mixed-use and housing projects, guided land preservation that includes a significant sand dune preserve, and led the redevelopment of blighted commercial and industrial sites, among them a half-dozen parcels set to remake the historic downtown with new housing, office, and retail.

Awarded $100K Per Development Agreement. In Eliopulos v. City of Palmdale, we successfully obtained a writ upholding the City of Palmdale’s rejection of a proposed apartment project under a development agreement. We also successfully dismissed all remaining breach of contract and civil rights claims at the demurrer stage. Summary judgment dismissed the case. Appeal affirmed in full the court’s dismissal. The City was awarded $100,000-plus in attorneys’ fees against the developer per the development agreement.

Pursued construction defect claims against the general contractor on a one million square foot warehouse in Northern California for the real estate investment arm of a national insurance company. The recovery followed the discovery of contractor fraud involving installation of a non-fire-rated roof assembly, evidence located because the lead lawyer had trained as an architect before practicing law.

Meyers Nave represents the Ventura County Transportation Commission (“VCTC”) on a rail expansion project (to add a second track and redevelop a station) in the City of Simi Valley. As in the City of Corona’s CPI Properties case and Royal Ridge Investment case, VCTC needs to acquire fee title, a permanent easement, and a temporary construction easement (part takes) from an improved larger parcel. The property in VCTC’s case is not a commercial or retail property, but is instead an apartment complex.

Successfully represented West Basin Municipal Water District in seeking rescission and disgorgement related to an interest-rate swap transaction tainted by bribery. The court granted summary adjudication invalidating the transaction under Government Code §1092 after a former elected board member pled guilty to corruption charges, completely relieving the District from substantial financial obligations associated with the corrupt transaction.

Southern California Gas Company (Porter Ranch). Meyers Nave assisted the County of Los Angeles on the largest methane gas release in U.S. history, consulting with the county public health department, assessing the legal exposure quickly, and obtaining a temporary restraining order and a permanent injunction that allowed the 3,000 relocated families to remain in safe alternative housing.

Represented a manufacturer of video game components in a contract and tort action in California state court arising from a dispute with its supplier, and won a defense decision at bench trial in Los Angeles Superior Court on breach of contract claims arising from an international sale of scrap iron, a cross-border transaction turning on expert testimony about the scrap market in South Korea and sales originating in Mexico.

Meyers Nave represented 3CE in connection with a contract negotiation with DEPCOM Power. 3CE was seeking to build up to 30MW of front-of-the-meter small scale energy storage projects (each sized between 1-5 MW each) throughout its service area. We were brought in to assist in the contract negotiations after DEPCOM had been shortlisted after an open bid process.

Defended an international transportation and equipment manufacturer in a contract dispute and consolidated products liability actions in California state and federal court arising from a train derailment.

Successful defense of a timber company in an action under Business and Professions Code section 17200 alleging errors in timber reporting during the CEQA and Sustained Yield Plan process.

Defended an international shipping company in state and federal court breach of contract actions in New York, Utah, Texas, Michigan and California, which included several trials.

Achieved a highly favorable settlement following mediation on behalf of an international heavy industry manufacturer in a breach of contract dispute.

Defended an international LCD screen manufacturer in an antitrust class action arising from allegations of international price fixing.

Defended an online travel company against antitrust claims arising from alleged hotel-online travel company pricing agreements.

Represented a Chinese manufacturing company in a patent dispute and related attorney disciplinary actions.