Staff2018-04-12T13:45:42-08:00June 8th, 2017|law review articles|Comments Off on Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles Article By Andrew H. Friedman
Top Medical Malpractice Lawyers in Los Angeles
Expertise.com Selects Helmer Friedman LLP As One Of The Top 18 Medical Malpractice Lawyers In Los Angeles
Expertise.com, a self-described hub where qualified experts can connect with people to share their knowledge, experience, and skills, has selected Helmer Friedman LLP as one of the top medical malpractice law firms in Los Angeles. After looking at 855 medical malpractice lawyers in Los Angeles and grading them on five factors (reputation, credibility, experience, availability, and professionalism), Expertise.com selected Helmer Friedman LLP as one of the top 18 such law firms and awarded the firm the following badge:

To view the rankings, you can visit Expertise.com at https://www.expertise.com/ca/los-angeles/medical-malpractice-attorney
Helmer Friedman LLP defeats Landlord’s Anti-SLAPP Motion
This morning, Helmer Friedman LLP defeated a landlord’s motion to dismiss a familial status discrimination lawsuit (Pitts v. Financial Management Co. – Los Angeles Superior Court Case No.: BC644978). In the underlying lawsuit, a Los Angeles area couple, Karen Pitts and Michael Pitts sued their landlord (defendants Actress Frieda Rentie and Financial Management Company), alleging after Ms. Rentie learned that Karen Pitts was pregnant and she and her husband Michael were expecting their second child, Ms. Rentie gave them a “60 day notice to quit”, which terminated their lease. In response, the defendants filed a motion – called an anti-SLAPP motion – pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16 to dismiss the Pitts’ lawsuit, contending that it was frivolous litigation and that it arose from the defendant’s “60 day notice to quit” which was an exercise of their right to petition the government. The Pitts, represented by Andrew H. Friedman of Helmer Friedman LLP, argued that the Pitts’ FEHA discrimination lawsuit arose from the landlord’s allegedly discriminatory eviction and not any protected activity. At the hearing on the defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion, the Honorable Judge Ernest M. Hiroshige (Department 54 of the Los Angeles Superior Court) denied the motion filed in response to the plaintiffs’ FEHA discrimination lawsuit. In his decision, Judge Hiroshige agreed with the arguments made by Mr. Friedman: “Defendant Frieda Rentie, individually and dba Financial Management Company, moves to strike the complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute (CCP § 425. 16). Defendant contends that Plaintiffs’ action arises out of service of the 60-day notice to quit- a necessary prerequisite to filing an unlawful detainer actions- and thus falls under the protection of the anti-SLAPP statute. The Court disagrees . . . Plaintiffs’ are not challenging the eviction procedure but the eviction decision itself. Thus, while service of the 60-day notice is arguably a protected activity, Plaintiffs’ complaint does not arise from this activity and thus is not subject to the anti-SLAPP statute. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED.” You can read Defendants’ motion here, the Pitts’ opposition here, and the Court’s decision here.
Ninth Circuit Rules In Favor of Helmer Friedman LLP
This afternoon, a unanimous three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Helmer Friedman LLP’s clients Crystal Monique Lightfoot and Beverly Hollis-Arrington (Case No. 10-56068).
Following the victory of Helmer Friedman LLP in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in January 2017 on behalf of Ms. Lightfoot and Ms. Hollis-Arrington, Fannie Mae filed a motion with the Ninth Circuit to, in effect, disregard the Supreme Court’s decision, and, instead, to affirm the District Court’s dismissal of their case. After extensive briefing, the Ninth Circuit denied Fannie Mae’s Motion. Instead, the Ninth Circuit granted the relief that Helmer Friedman LLP had requested and remanded the case to the District Court with instructions to vacate its prior judgment in favor of Fannie Mae and then remand the case back to California State Court.
“As with the Supreme Court’s decision, this decision from the Ninth Circuit is also complete vindication for our clients who have argued for years that their lawsuit against Fannie Mae should be heard in the California state courts and not in federal court,” commented Andrew H. Friedman of Beverly Hills-based Helmer Friedman LLP.
A copy of Fannie Mae’s Motion can be found here.
Helmer Friedman LLP’s Opposition to Fannie Mae’s Motion can be found here.
Unanimous U. S. Supreme Court Sides With Helmer Friedman LLP
This morning, in a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the U. S. Supreme Court sided with Helmer Friedman LLP’s clients Crystal Monique Lightfoot and Beverly Hollis-Arrington and held that Fannie Mae’s sue-and-be-sued clause does not grant district courts jurisdiction over cases involving Fannie Mae. The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit which had ruled against Ms. Lightfoot and Ms. Hollis-Arrington.
“This decision is complete vindication for our clients who have argued for years that their lawsuit against Fannie Mae should be heard in the California state courts and not in federal court,” commented Gregory D. Helmer and Andrew H. Friedman of Beverly Hills-based Helmer Friedman LLP.
Here is the opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/14-1055_6j36.pdf
How a Trump Presidency Will Affect the Employment Law Landscape?
December 6, 2016 – Join Andrew H. Friedman, founding partner of Helmer Friedman LLP, Anthony J. Oncidi, head of the Los Angeles labor and employment law group at Proskauer Rose LLP, and David B. Weisenfeld, the legal editor for the preemployment background check, job advertising, and interviewing and selection content in the recruiting and hiring section of XpertHR USA, for this fast-paced webinar, where we explore all of the key issues on your mind, including:
Will the ACA really be repealed, or is a rebooting more likely?
What can employers expect from the EEOC and DOL?
Is overtime pay reform going to be off the table at the federal level?
Paid parental leave was a campaign talking point, but how realistic is it?
And how will the election affect the Supreme Court?
http://www.xperthr.com/pages/hr-webinars/
You can view this webinar by clicking on the following link:
Helmer Friedman LLP Takes Case To Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.
Washington, D.C. – Helmer Friedman LLP Takes Case To Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.
Gregory D. Helmer and Andrew H. Friedman outside the U.S. Supreme Court with their client, Beverly Hollis-Arrington — one of the most courageous people we know. Fannie Mae foreclosed on her home in 2002 but she stood up and took them all the way to the Supreme Court (with a little help from Helmer Friedman LLP).









