Oasis West Realty v. Goldman
51 Cal. 4th 811
| Cal. | 2011Background
- Oasis West Realty, LLC hired Goldman and Reed Smith in 2004 to obtain Hilton project approvals in Beverly Hills.
- Goldman terminated Oasis’s representation around 2006.
- In 2008 Goldman campaigned against the Hilton project, soliciting signatures for a referendum to overturn approvals.
- Measure H passed by narrow margin in November 2008.
- Oasis filed suit in January 2009 for breach of fiduciary duty, professional negligence, and breach of contract; anti-SLAPP motion filed in March 2009; Court of Appeal reversed; California Supreme Court reversed Court of Appeal and held Oasis had minimal merit and viable claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Oasis’s claims have minimal merit under anti-SLAPP | Oasis demonstrates likelihood of prevailing on breach duties and contract | Defendants contend claims arise from protected petition/speech activity | Yes; Oasis shown to have minimal merit and survive anti-SLAPP threshold |
| Whether Goldman breached loyalty/confidentiality duties against Oasis | Goldman used confidential Oasis information to oppose the Hilton project | No breach or improper use established beyond speculation | Yes; duties of loyalty/confidentiality extended post-termination were violated |
| Whether the former-client loyalty/confidentiality rule applies beyond two circumstances | Rule should bar use of former-client confidences to oppose ongoing project | Rule should be limited to related representations or disclosed confidences | Yes; a broad post-termination duty against using confidences applied to this conduct |
Key Cases Cited
- Wutchumna Water Co. v. Bailey, 216 Cal. 564 (1932) (attorney owes loyalty and confidentiality after severing relationship)
- People ex rel. Deukmejian v. Brown, 29 Cal.3d 150 (1981) (confidential information not to be misused by former counsel)
- City of Cotati v. Cashman, 29 Cal.4th 69 (2002) (two-step anti-SLAPP framework)
- Navellier v. Sletten, 29 Cal.4th 82 (2002) (threshold/probability analysis for anti-SLAPP)
- Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert Hafif, 39 Cal.4th 260 (2006) (two-prong anti-SLAPP analysis; affirming meritorious claim under minimal merit)