News

Ray Gates and Brian Rosenthal Receive Defense Verdict in Assault and Battery Action

Raymond Gates and Brian Rosenthal defended a hospital and a number of their employees in an assault and battery action filed in San Luis Obispo County. The plaintiff was entering areas of the hospital that were restricted and got into an altercation with various hospital staff that were attempting to stop him. The matter was tried in August 2011. Ray and Brian argued that the hospital staff did not commit an assault or battery, but instead they took reasonable steps to protect patients. The jury unanimously found for the defense.

Ray Gates Successfully Defends Medical Center in Medical Malpractice Case

In June 2011, Ray Gates represented Renown Regional Medical Center, the sole trauma center in Reno, Nevada. This case involved a 2 ½ year old child with claims of failure to diagnose a small bowel obstruction resulting in permanent bowel damage and shortened life span. The jury returned a defense verdict after a four week trial.

Ray Gates’ and Brian Rosenthal’s Pharmacy Client Dismissed and Appellate Court Then Upheld the Dismissal

In June 2010, the California Court of Appeal affirmed in Whittemore v. Owens, 185 Cal. App. 4th 1194 (2010) the trial court’s dismissal of the claims against our client a retail pharmacy. In the original trial court action, Ray Gates and Brian Rosenthal successfully argued that the doctrine of “unclean hands” bars the plaintiff from recovery as she was engaging in illegal conduct. Plaintiff appealed this judgment arguing that the Drug Dealer Liability Act (Health and Safety Code § 11700 et seq.) created an exception to the unclean hands doctrine. Ray Gates and Brian Rosenthal also represented the pharmacy during the appeal. The appellate court affirmed the Judgment of Dismissal and published the decision.

Mark Tokunaga Granted Summary Judgment in Favor of Mammoth Mountain

In Towns v. Davidson, Mammoth Mountain, 147 Cal.App.4th 461 (2007), is one of Mark Tokunaga’s victories in the Court of Appeal. In Towns, the plaintiff was injured while skiing at Mammoth Mountain when she was involved in a collision with a ski host, an employee of Mammoth Mountain. The plaintiff argued that Mammoth Mountain increased the risk of collisions by requiring employees to be skiing on the slopes. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Mammoth Mountain. The Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that collisions between skiers is an inherent risk of skiing no matter who the other skier is. The Court of Appeal also ruled that the trial court correctly struck the entire declaration of the plaintiff’s expert, who submitted a declaration alleging that Mammoth Mountain’s employee was reckless, not merely negligent.

Ray Gates Granted Summary Judgment and the Nevada Supreme Affirmed the Trial Court’s Ruling

In Korton v. Conrad, Inc., 119 Nev. Adv. Rep. 14, 67 P.2d 316 (2003), the Nevada Supreme Court upheld a grant of summary judgment Ray Gates obtained in favor of an employer who was sued for wrongful death allegedly caused by the employer’s employee. The case, which Ray handled both the trial court and Supreme Court levels, further defined Nevada’s “going and coming rule”, which establishes when an employer is liable for injuries caused by an employee’s driving.

Mark Tokunaga Receives a Defense Verdict for Ski Resort

In 2003, Mark Tokunaga defended a California ski resort.  Plaintiff claimed that the ski resort created a dangerous condition on a ski run and failed to remedy or warn of that condition.  Mark successfully defended the ski resort at trial in which the jury took only 11 minutes to deliberate before returning the defense verdict.

Mark Tokunaga Receives a Trial Court’s Dismissal and the Court of Appeal Affirmed Trial Court’s Ruling

Platzer v. Mammoth Mountain Ski Area was tried in May 2001 by Mark Tokunaga. This was a case in which the mother of a seven-year-old boy signed a release of liability when she placed her son in a ski school lesson. The boy was seriously injured when he fell from a chairlift (a common carrier). The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of all negligence claims based on the release and upheld the jury’s verdict in favor of Mammoth Mountain Ski Area on the issue of gross negligence. Platzer v. Mammoth Mountain Ski Area, 104 Cal.App.4th 1253 (2002)

California Office

1755 Creekside Oaks Drive, Suite 240
Sacramento, CA 95833

Tel. (916) 492-2000
Fax (916) 492-2500

Northern Nevada Office

800 East College Parkway
Carson City, NV 89706

Tel. (775) 772-8016
Fax (916) 492-2500

Las Vegas Office

601 South Seventh Street
Las Vegas, NV 89101

Tel. (702) 387-8633
Fax (702) 387-8635