Claudia L. Stone
Claudia L. Stone has been a member of Nemecek & Cole since November 2004.
Claudia is recognized for her handling of civil litigation through trial and, where possible, has resolved matters in alternative dispute processes and/or settlement. She has argued cases before California Courts of Appeal and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. Prior to joining Nemecek & Cole, Claudia was a partner with Bronson, Bronson & McKinnon LLP. Claudia was also senior counsel with Allen Matkins, Leck, Gamble, Mallory & Natsis LLP.
- Professional Liability Defense
- Business Litigation
- Commercial Real Estate Litigation
- Creditors' Rights
- Bankruptcy Litigation
- Commercial Landlord/Tenant Disputes
B.A., University of California at Los Angeles, 1978 cum laude
J.D., Southwestern University School of Law, 1983
American Business Trial Lawyers
California State Bar
Claudia has two daughters, Tamar and Karen. Claudia’s husband, Michael B. Van-Scoy Mosher, M.D., is a practicing oncologist at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center.
Notable Cases/Published Decisions
- Moua v. Pittullo, Howington, Barker, Abernathy, LLP (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 107
[summary judgment affirmed in case where client did not follow attorney’s settlement advice]
- Represented a prominent trial lawyer in arbitration of a ten million dollar legal malpractice claim based on his alleged failure to request a proper measure of damage instruction during a federal jury trial. The year long arbitration resulted in a zero monetary award for the claimant.
- Represented a real estate law firm in a five million dollar legal malpractice case based on its alleged failure to timely raise the “one-action rule” and anti-deficiency statutes as an absolute bar to a judicial foreclosure and fraud action. The plaintiff paid the law firm past due fees to settle the case after we established through a judicial reference that these statutes did not apply as a matter of law.
- Represented an estate planning law firm in legal malpractice case filed by a relative of its murdered client. The relative alleged that he would have been the client's heir but for the firm's negligence in drafting the client's estate planning documents. We obtained summary judgment arguing that the relative could not prove that he was an intended beneficiary of the client's estate.
- Represented a real estate developer in a month long jury trial in a $17 million partnership dispute resulting in a defense verdict for the developer.
- Civic Ctr. Square v. Ford (9th Cir.1993) 12 F.3d 875 (a case of first impression in the Ninth Circuit establishing that a party's appearance in a closely related or identical case constitutes an appearance requiring notice of motion for default judgment in another case.)
- Beckman v. Thompson (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 481 [inducement to breach contract occurring outside of California, which affected a California resident, did not establish California jurisdiction.]