Tira Law APC Legal Blog
A Business And Real Estate Litigation Firm Serving California
Patrick Tira is a highly skilled attorney with a demonstrated history of resolving business and real property disputes. He also has extensive experience in creditor/debtor's rights, trade secret protection, shareholder disputes, and real estate finance.
Over the past ten years, Mr. Tira gained extensive experience first at a boutique law firm located in La Jolla, California and later as a partner with a national law firm largely based in Chicago, Illinois.
Mr. Tira is experienced in all stages of litigation, including motion practice, depositions and other discovery, negotiation, mediation, arbitration, trial, and appeal. Mr. Tira has recovered millions for his clients in judgments and arbitration awards, in addition to resolving most disputes with demurrers and motions to dismiss.
In addition to his success in the courtroom, Mr. Tira takes pride in assisting businesses and individuals to quickly resolve disputes and avoid litigation through effective sales contracts, purchase agreements, non-disclosure agreements, software license and development agreements, powers of attorney, shareholder agreements, promissory notes and security agreements, easement agreements, and employment contracts.
Mr. Tira is admitted to practice law in California, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and in the United States District Courts for the Southern, Central, Eastern, and Northern Districts of California.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a bankruptcy court’s application of California’s increased homestead exemption amount in determining whether a debtor may avoid a lien created in 2013. In so ruling, the Ninth Circuit held that bankruptcy courts must apply the state exemption law in effect on the filing date of the bankruptcy petition, rather than on the creation date of the lien.
Calif. App. Court Enforces Co-Tenancy Provision; Holds Liquidated Damages Limitations Do Not Apply Without a Contractual Breach
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that the federal removal statute authorizes only a “defendant or the defendants” to remove an action to federal court. The Ninth Circuit reversed a District Court’s order denying a borrower’s motion to remand, after an unnamed Trustee removed the action to federal court on behalf of a defendant Trust. In so ruling, the Ninth Circuit held that because an unnamed party removed the case, the District Court should have remanded it instead of retaining jurisdiction.
The California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, recently held that an elder, who is both beneficiary and personal representative of a probate estate, has standing to bring a claim of financial elder abuse in her individual capacity based on allegations that her son...
The California Supreme Court recently held that Section 637.2 of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, Pen. Code, § 630, et seq. (“CIPA”) prohibits parties as well as nonparties from intentionally recording a communication transmitted between a cellular or cordless...
The California Court of Appeal, First District, recently affirmed a trial court’s denial of a request for attorneys’ fees, after a consumer prevailed under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act against an assignee of his consumer credit contract. The Court of Appeal...
The California Court of Appeal, Second District, recently reversed a trial court’s confirmation of an arbitration award against a nonsignatory to an arbitration agreement where the arbitrator found the nonsignatory was the alter ego of a signatory. The Court of Appeal...
The California Court of Appeal, First District, recently affirmed a trial court’s order granting summary judgment against a debt collector for violating the FDCPA and the RFDPCA. In so ruling, the Court of Appeal applied a credit card agreement’s Delaware...
The California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, recently affirmed a trial court’s judgment against a class action plaintiff who alleged that a lender violated Penal Code § 632.7 of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, by recording him without prior notice. The...
*This blog is intended to be for informational purposes only and is not intended to be treated as legal advice. You should not rely on or act on any information from this Website without consulting with a competent attorney licensed to practice law in your jurisdiction. Neither this Website nor use of the information from the Website creates an attorney-client relationship. This Website may contain links to other internet sites. These links are provided to assist you in searching for other resources or information that may be of interest to you and are not endorsements of any products or services. The owner of this site assumes no liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions in the content contained on this site