LOTS OF EXPERIENCE
Additional Information
Numerous Victories in Superior Courts and Arbitrations
Los Angeles Superior Court Appoints VALENCIA & CYWINSKA as Lead Class Counsel in Class Action Involving in Excess of 1000 Class Members. Courts Grants Final Approval of Class Action After Three Years of Class Action Litigation.
It is extremely difficult to attain appellate review by the California Supreme Court. The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia, the sole attorneys for petitioner, attained review in the matter Baltazar v. Forever 21, Inc., (2012) 212 Cal.App.4th 221. The successful petition was completed by both Mr. Mark Joseph Valencia, Esq. and Mrs. Izabela Cywinska Valencia, Esq., California Supreme Court, S208345
On Behalf of Plaintiff, The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia defended against an appeal brought by Monex Credit Company. The Court of Appeal agreed with The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia and concurred that there was extrinsic mistake and positive misconduct. Accordingly, Plaintiff may pursue his claims for damages in excess of 1.4 million dollars.
On Behalf of Plaintiff, The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia Litigates a Sexual and Racial Harassment Action Against Plaintiff's Former Employer, Forever 21, Inc. The Defendants Petition the Court to Enforce the Arbitration Agreement that Plaintiff Signed with Forever 21, Inc., Which Would Compel the Action to Arbitration. The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia, After Significant Briefing, Proves That the Arbitration Agreement is Unenforceable, as it is Unconscionable. Accordingly, the Court Denies The Motion to Compel Arbitration, and Therefore the Action Will Proceed in Los Angeles Superior Court.
Client Retain Law Firm to Set Aside/Vacate Dismissal With Prejudice From April 2010. Appealing to the Equitable Powers of the Court, The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia Successfully Brings a Motion to Reactivate the Litigation and Set Aside the Dismissal With Prejudice. Initially, the Tentative Ruling was to Deny the Motion, but after Successful Oral Argument by Mr. Valencia, the Trial Court Reverses Itself and Grants the Motion.
Superior Court Denies Playboy Entertainment Group's Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict (JNOV) and Motion for Remittitur. The Court, However, Grants Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees and Awards $404,425.00. The Court Further Reimburses Plaintiff Her Costs of Litigation In The Amount of $61,740.38. This Is All In Addition to the Jury Award of $182,500.00
GREAT NEWS: After a Three Week Jury Trial, The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia, ALC, Attains a Sexual Harassment Jury Verdict Against Playboy Entertainment Group. The Jury Also Found that Playboy Failed to Prevent Sexual Harassment Against Plaintiff. Jury Awards $182,500.00. Defendants Represented by International Law Firm Morgan Lewis and Bockius.
The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia, ALC Files Wrongful Termination Action on Behalf of Senior Scientist Against Pall Corporation.
Federal Bankruptcy Judge Agrees with Mr. Valencia and Orders Two Superior Court Actions to Return to Los Angeles Superior Court, Despite Fierce Opposition by Bankruptcy Attorneys Representing Debtor in
After 16 Months of Litigation, Plaintiff and Defendant Settle Sexual Harassment Action.
Superior Court Judge Grants Plaintiff's Motion Compelling Witness to Answer Questions At Deposition. Superior Court Further Sanctions Both Defendant and Defense Attorney in the Amount of $2,500.00.
GREAT NEWS: Appellate Court Reverses Judgment by Trial Court. In September 2008, The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia Tried A Four Week Jury Trial to Verdict. Trial Court Did Not Allow Pertinent Issues To Go To The Jury. Verdict Against Plaintiff. Mark Joseph Valencia Appeals And The Appellate Court Vacates Judgment. Case Will Proceed to Retrial!
Plaintiff sues Defendant for upwards of $75,000 for contractual damages. The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia represents Defendant. The case is dismissed and Defendant does not pay any monetary amount to Plaintiff.
The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia Petitions the California Supreme Court For Review With Regard to Specific Employment Litigation Defenses and Its Affect on Public Policy.
The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia, ALC Prevails in the California Court of Appeals. The Appellate Court, In Full, Reverses the Trial Court's Ruling.
Client Retains Firm to Prosecute Sexual Harassment and Sexual Battery Action Against Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc.
Mr. Valencia Represents Defendants in Civil Harassment Action. Plaintiffs Are Represented by Mega-Firm Nixon Peabody. Defendants Refuse to Settle With Plaintiffs. After Witness Testimony and Argument, Judge Dismisses The Case.
GREAT NEWS: Appellate Court Reverses Judgment by Trial Court. In September 2008, The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia Tried A Four Week Jury Trial to Verdict. Trial Court Did Not Allow Pertinent Issues To Go To The Jury. Verdict Against Plaintiff. Mark Joseph Valencia Appeals And The Appellate Court Vacates Judgment. Case Will Proceed to Retrial!
Plaintiff sues Defendant for upwards of $75,000 for contractual damages. The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia represents Defendant. The case is dismissed and Defendant does not pay any monetary amount to Plaintiff.
The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia Petitions the California Supreme Court For Review With Regard to Specific Employment Litigation Defenses and Its Affect on Public Policy.
The Law Offices of Mark Joseph Valencia, ALC Prevails in the California Court of Appeals. The Appellate Court, In Full, Reverses the Trial Court's Ruling.
Client Retains Firm to Prosecute Sexual Harassment and Sexual Battery Action Against Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc.
Mr. Valencia Represents Defendants in Civil Harassment Action. Plaintiffs Are Represented by Mega-Firm Nixon Peabody. Defendants Refuse to Settle With Plaintiffs. After Witness Testimony and Argument, Judge Dismisses The Case.
Mr. Valencia Represents Both the Corporate President and the Defendant Corporation in a Two Week Jury Trial Regarding a Breach of Contract Action.
Successfully Defeats Defendant's Motion to Modify and/or Terminate Preliminary Injunction. Motion Denied in its Entirety Despite Defendant Presenting Affidavits from Approximately 150 Different Witnesses.
Successfully Defeated Defendants' Motion for Summary Adjudication In Its Entirety. Plaintiff's Claims for Fraud and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Will Proceed Forward, As Well As Plaintiff's Request for Punitive Damages.
Represented Defendant Corporation and Defendant President in a Lawsuit Where Plaintiff Was Seeking $145,000 in Damages. After Successful Argument, Court Dismissed Action In Its Entirety Based on the Holding that the Contract was Illegal.
Despite Fierce Opposition, Successfully Attained a Preliminary Injunction and Court Order Pursuant to Both Uniform Trade Secrets Act and Unfair Competition Statutes. The Order States that Former Employee Cannot Solicit Any Current or Former Clients of His Former Employer.
Tried a Two Week Medical Malpractice Lawsuit to Jury Verdict. Trial Defense Attorney was Chuck Law of Law and Brandmeyer. Six Medical Doctors Called to the Stand, Along with Corporate Representatives. Defendant's Motions for Non-Suit and Directed Verdict Denied.
Attained a Temporary Restraining Order For Corporation With 10,000 Tax Clients. The Temporary Restraining Order Prevents Former Employee From Soliciting Any Current Clients of His Former Employer.
Filed a Shareholders Derivative Lawsuit On Behalf of Shareholders of Beverly Hills Corporation Suing Other Shareholders of Same Corporation.
Attained Leave to Add Punitive Damages to Amended Complaint Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.13.
Medical Doctor Retains Firm to Explore All Possible Causes of Action, Including Discrimination, Against Residency Program.
Represented a Roman Catholic Priest And Successfully Attained a Temporary Restraining Order Against Third Party For Harassing Conduct, Despite Zealous First Amendment Arguments.
Attained Thousands of Dollars in Sanctions Against Defendant Corporation, Defendant President, and Defendants’ Lawyers Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 128.5. Defendants Brought a Frivolous Anti-SLAPP Motion as their Defense . . . and Lost.
Along With Plaintiff's Team, Successfully Defeated Defendants’ Summary Judgment Motion Regarding an Employment Action That Involved a Former President Suing the Company he founded. Two Large National Litigation Firms Represented Defendants.
