This case involved the construction of a pool, spa, surge tank and hardscape improvements at the Plaintiff’s property in Sherman Oaks, CA. Our client supplied and delivered decorative blocks for a pre-cast screen wall.
After being retained to defend the client after they were served with a Cross-Complaint, we conducted an investigation to compare the universe of claims being alleged against the client’s scope of work. This investigation revealed that none of the Plaintiff’s claims implicated the client’s scope of work, and we demanded that the client be dismissed. After some back and forth discussions, it was agreed that our client would be dismissed. Thus, before our answer was due, the client was dismissed
Please Note: This article is necessarily general in nature and is not a substitute for legal advice with respect to any particular case. Readers should consult with an attorney before taking any action affecting their interests.