ADR Services, Inc.

19000 MacArthur Boulevard

Suite 550

Irvine, California 92612

  • Plaintiff alleged that a Defendant Hospital and Nurse employee failed to provide appropriate medical treatment due to Plaintiff’s sexual orientation and religious beliefs.  Defendant’s expert asserted that the medical care provided was well within the standard of care.

  • Breach of Written Commission Agreement between mortgage lender and branch manager; failure to pay all wages and earned commissions.

  • Employee alleged breach of verbal employment agreement. Plaintiff contends Employer Company promised her an ownership interest in the company in exchange for a reduced salary.

  • Breach of Business Buy/Sale Agreement. Dispute between buyer and seller regarding terms and conditions for a written Purchase Agreement. Calculation of business expenses, value of inventory and terms of Promissory Note were contested.

  • Commission dispute. Issue involved whether commissions were “earned” or “vested”, when is payment due, and the obligation to pay employee for sales that were pending prior to separation from the company.

  • The merger of two companies resulted in the layoff of numerous individuals. Severance packages were offered to most. Plaintiff instead was offered a new position with same pay and benefits. She was terminated a short time later and demanded the severance package offered to the R.I.F. employees.

  • Commissioned salesperson and national sales company had a dispute over terms and conditions of Plaintiff’s compensation arrangement. Did the handwritten memo of compensation prevail or the terms and conditions of the company’s written payment plan?

  • Long term employee with high tech manufacturing company is laid off in a R.I. F. Issue involved vesting of options, failure to timely exercise and enforceability of verbal agreement to issue additional shares.

  • Plaintiff alleged he was terminated in violation of public policy alleging the company fired him to prevent the payment of commissions on a very large order that was about to be secured.

  • Tech Start-up Company. Dispute between software developers and company as to ownership of developed software in light of allegation that company failed to pay for services as agreed. Dispute as to contract interpretation and quality of services provided.

  • Action by the State Compensation Insurance Fund (Workers Comp) to collect premium payment from Defendant Company. Company alleged its workers were improperly classified resulting in a higher premium rating.

  • Fraud; Intentional Misrepresentation. Employee worked for a private security company that operated jails for I.C.E. and other government agencies. Plaintiff was induced to accept a position at a new facility. Shortly thereafter the facility was shut down and Plaintiff was not offered reassignment to his old position.

  • Action against a County Government for failing to issue a Conditional Use Permit allowing for the expansion of Plaintiff’s business facility. The County did erroneously issue a C.U.P. to Plaintiff’s competitor. Plaintiff argued that he was denied the C.U.P. due to his place of origin and religious beliefs.

  • Plaintiffs worked for an animal rescue foundation. Defendant contends Plaintiffs were terminated for smoking marijuana on the premises. Plaintiffs allege that their termination was in retaliation for complaining about the cruelty and neglect of the animals in violation of state law.

  • Long term employee suspected of being under the influence of drugs in the workplace; refused drug test resulting in termination. Did company have sufficient probable cause to demand drug test?

  • Commercial contract dispute; negligence. The parties had a contractual relationship. An unknown third party hacked one of the parties’ computer systems causing a large monetary payment to be sent to the hacker instead of the intended party. Primary issue was who should be responsible for the loss.

  • Promissory estoppel; fraud. Plaintiff worked for a private security firm that provided services to a Federal agency. Plaintiff requested a transfer to a different facility alleging that the company assured him it would be a permanent position. The new facility shut down a few months after the transfer and Plaintiff was let go.

  • Commercial Landlord-Tenant dispute. Former tenant removed fixtures/equipment when vacating premises. Were items personal property or part of the realty?

  • Volunteer or employee? Plaintiff was a frequent provider of content on a popular social media site. Was she entitled to compensation?

Copyright © 2017 Robert D. Coviello, Esq. All Rights Reserved
Developed by ADR Services, Inc.

FEHA/EEOC/Title VII (Age and Race Discrimination)