James P. Fogelman is a partner in the Los Angeles office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. He is a member of the firm's Litigation Department. Mr. Fogelman earned his law degree in 1992 from UCLA School of Law. He received a Bachelor of Science degree in economics, with a concentration in finance, from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1989.
Mr. Fogelman has represented clients in a variety of civil litigation matters, including those involving claims of consumer fraud, unfair trade practices, false advertising, consumer protection act violations, product liability, state and federal antitrust law violations, professional negligence, commercial, residential/commercial real estate and construction disputes, securities law violations, directors' and officers' liability, and complex business disputes. Mr. Fogelman has also represented clients in connection with investigations by various state and federal agencies and regulatory bodies, including the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice, various state attorney general offices, and the N.A.S.D.
Representative class action matters include:
Continental Forge et al. v. Southern California Gas Company et al. Represented defendants Southern California Gas Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company and Sempra Energy in numerous consolidated class actions in San Diego Superior Court, in which the plaintiff class consisted of almost every user of natural gas and electricity in California, and in which plaintiffs sought in excess of $23 billion in damages. The plaintiffs alleged a conspiracy to restrict the supply of natural gas into California and raise the price for natural gas and electricity. The matter was tried to a jury, and about two months into the trial the matter settled on favorable terms.
In re Seven Hills Golf Course Litigation: Represented Rio Hotel Suites & Casino in two bench trials, and a related appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court, of consolidated class actions filed in the District Court of Nevada, Clark County, in which the plaintiffs had sought to set aside the Rio's purchase of a multi-million dollar golf course and establish special rights to play on the course. The purchase was affirmed and no special rights to play the course were established.
Melendrez et al. v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. Represented DaimlerChrysler corporation in a putative nationwide class action filed in New Mexico, in which plaintiffs alleged claims of product defect, false advertising and warranty law violations under New Mexico law, the UCC and the Michigan Consumer Protection Act, in connection with an allegedly defective “seat back mechanism” in certain Dodge Ram trucks. Defeated class certification and prevailed on a motion to dismiss. No appeal was filed.
Lubitz v. et al. v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. Acted as both trial and national coordinating counsel for DaimlerChrysler in a series of class actions filed across the United States alleging safety defects and false advertising, and breach of warranty, in connection with the braking system of certain Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles. While dispositive and class motions were pending in most of the actions, negotiated a complicated but favorable settlement of all claims on a nationwide basis, involving over 1.4 million vehicles and 2.8 million consumers. Obtained approval of the nationwide class settlement in New Jersey state court. No appeal was filed.
Verderber v. Reno Hilton Resorts Corporation et al.: Represented several affiliates of Harrah’s Entertainment, Inc. in a class action filed in the Second Judicial District Court of Nevada, County of Washoe (Reno) involving allegations of illness by guests and patrons at the Reno Hilton. Negotiated and obtained approval for nationwide settlement of claims.
Phillips v. DaimlerChrysler Corporation: Represented DaimlerChrysler Corporation in a putative nationwide class action involving claims of false advertising and unfair trade practices filed in Superior Court in Sacramento, California. The case was dismissed at the pleading stage pursuant to a motion to strike, and attorneys’ fees were awarded to the defendant. The appeal was waived in exchange for a waiver of the fee award.
Representative securities matters include:
Alberts v. Casino Data Systems: Represented Casino Data Systems in an action filed in the District Court of Nevada, Clark County, in which a putative class action attempted to block an international merger. The action was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice in the face of defendant’s motion to dismiss.
Corona Corp. et al. v. Global Capital Partners et al.: Represented Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu in an action filed in Superior Court in Los Angeles, California, in which plaintiffs had alleged claims of misrepresentation in connection with their purchase of stock in an Austrian-based company. The action was dismissed upon the sustaining of defendant’s demurrer without leave to amend. No appeal was filed.
Representative real estate matters include:
California Job Journal et al. v. Pacific Gulf Properties et al.: Represented FountainGlen Properties in several dozen lawsuits filed in Superior Court in Sacramento, California in which plaintiffs had alleged economic and personal injury claims related to the alleged existence of so-called “toxic mold” in an industrial office park. The matters were settled in the face of a pending summary judgment motion on the plaintiffs’ claims.
Lee v. Franciscan Clinics: Represented Franciscan Clinics in an action filed in the Superior Court of Los Angeles, California, and on appeal, involving the option terms under a commercial lease. A petition to compel arbitration filed by the plaintiff was denied on the ground that the defendant had fully complied with the terms under the commercial lease and, therefore, there was nothing to arbitrate. The result was affirmed on appeal.
Representative professional negligence matters include:
Nancy Nelson et al. v. Loni Anderson et al.: Represented a law firm in an action filed in Los Angeles Superior Court alleging claims of professional negligence and intentional interference with contractual relations and economic advantage. Plaintiffs sought $173 million in damages relating to the failure of a direct marketing campaign involving Loni Anderson. A verdict was obtained in favor of the law firm defendant after a month-long jury trial. The plaintiff did not appeal the verdict.
In re Capital Consultants: Represented a law firm in an action filed by several large pension funds in Multnomah County Circuit Court in Portland, Oregon. Plaintiffs sought in excess of $100 million in damages relating to the bankruptcy of Capital Consultants, Inc., based on allegations of professional negligence. Summary judgment was obtained in favor of the law firm on statute of limitations grounds; the matter settled on appeal, leaving the judgment intact.
Mr. Fogelman is Co-Chair of the firm’s Legal Malpractice Defense Practice Group and a member of the firm’s Ethics Committee. Mr. Fogelman is a member of the bars of the State of California, the State of Nevada, the State of New York, and the District of Columbia, as well as of various United States District Courts and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. He has lectured on class actions, legal ethics and the attorney-client privilege. He also serves on the board of directors of the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles.