Matthew Negrin Attorney

First Admitted: 2003, California

Professional Webpage: https://www.negrinllp.com/team.aspx

Bar/Professional Activity:

American Academy of Attorney-CPAs Beverly Hills Bar Association
I lectured at the American Academy of Attorney-CPAs National Conference on the differences between California law and laws of the other 49 states at the National Conference for the American Academy of Attorney-CPAs. The lecture was titled “Welcome to the Wild Wild West-- California: One of Fifty States, or Its Own Country? Some California Distinctions for Lawyers”. This was both from the perspective of a practicing attorney as well as the perspective of a practicing CPA, to highlight the differences between California and the rest of the country. , 2023

Special Licenses/Certifications:

Certified Public Accountant. I became certified as a Certified Public Accountant by the California Board of Accountancy in 1999. , 1999
Certified Fraud Examiner. I am became certified as a Certified Fraud Examiner by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners in 1999. A Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) is a leader in the anti-fraud community, noted as a specialist in the prevention, detection and deterrence of fraud. CFEs represent the highest standards held by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE). , 1999

Honors/Awards:

I was rated as a top lawyer in Pasadena, California for the last four years., Top Lawyer Pasadena Magazine, Pasadena Magazine, 2022
I was rated as a top lawyer in Pasadena, California., Top Lawyer Pasadena Magazine, Pasadena Magazine, 2023
Honored to be invited to be a Fellow in the Litigation Counsel of America., Fellowship in Litigation Counsel of America, https://www.litcounsel.org/, 2022
Southern California Business Litigator of the Year by the publishers of US Business News, 2020

Scholarly Lectures/Writings:

I lectured on a complicated area involving fiduciary duties owed in managing or overseeing a trust or estate, which impacts business law, professional responsibilities, tax, accounting, and other related areas., Speaker at American Academy of Attorney-CPAs National Conference, The Uniform Prudent Investor Act: What do I do with that Kodak Stock?, Business Law, Professional Responsibility, Tax, Accounting, Trust And Estate Law, 2020
I lectured on the differences between California law and laws of the other 49 states at the National Conference for the American Academy of Attorney-CPAs. This was both from the perspective of a practicing attorney as well as the perspective of a practicing CPA, to highlight the differences between California and the rest of the country., Speaker at American Academy of Attorney-CPAs National Conference, Welcome to the Wild Wild West-- California: One of Fifty States, or Its Own Country? Some California Distinctions for Lawyers, Legal Industry, 2023

Other Outstanding Achievements:

I was nominated as a Super Lawyer.

Firm News (Newsletters):

“At no point during the course of the representation in the underlying matter did defendant provide written or oral guidance to plaintiff specifically addressing Proposition 51 or the significant joint and several liability risk posed by the economic damages in the underlying matter,” the complaint said. Takeaway: Texas Insurance alleged that Hinshaw & Culbertson failed to advise the company of the risk posed by joint and several liability prior to a jury returning an $11 million verdict against a cab company covered by the insurer. Court: California, Superior Court for the County of San Francisco Case Type: Legal Malpractice Industry: Legal Services, Insurance Lawyers: Matthew J. Negrin and Amy Gershoony of Negrin LLP in Los Angeles; counsel has not yet entered an appearance for the defense. Liability arguments:Texas Insurance named attorney Bradley M. Zamczyk, a partner with Hinshaw, and the law firm in the complaint, which alleged the insurer was not properly advised before a jury verdict was issued in an auto collision case. According to the complaint, the disputed stemmed from an underlying suit filed by Carissa Copeland in San Francisco Superior Court. The suit named DeSoto Cab Co. and its insurer, Texas Insurance. Although the jury returned a more than $11 million verdict in Copeland’s favor, only 3% of fault was assessed as Desoto’s responsibility. However, Texas Insurance was found jointly and severally liable for the verdict as required under California’s Proposition 51, which says joint and several liability applies to economic damages, while apportionment of fault applies to noneconomic damages. The carrier contended it would have settled with Copeland within the $1 million policy limits had they been advised of the risk posed by Proposition 51, according to the complaint. “At no point during the course of the representation in the underlying matter did defendant provide written or oral guidance to plaintiff specifically addressing Proposition 51 or the significant joint and several liability risk posed by the economic damages in the underlying matter,” the complaint said. Damages arguments:The carrier sought to recover the nearly $11 million that the jury assessed. Regarding causation, the insurer alleged that they could also prove that Copeland would have accepted a settlement offer within the policy limits, as evidenced by an offer she made while the case was pending. , Texas Insurer Slaps Hinshaw & Culbertson With Legal Mal Claim Over $11 Million Personal Injury Jury Award

Industry Groups:

Contact Matthew

All the below fields are required