Litigation and Dispute Resolution
Employment and Labor
Breach of Contract and Business Torts
Employee Benefits ERISA/Executive Compensation Litigation
University of Southern California School of Law, J.D. 1997
University of California, Berkeley, B.A. 1993
Mr. Davis also litigates matters involving ERISA violations and employee benefits, as well as representing companies involved in investigations of their retirement, health and welfare plans instituted by the Department of Labor.
Mr. Davis was associated previously with a large, national law firm representing national and international businesses in consumer class actions, unfair competition cases, and products liability cases.
Mr. Davis has had numerous successes obtaining favorable verdicts, rulings, and settlements on behalf of his clients.
Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a corporation in an action in probate court seeking to enforce a buy/sell agreement requiring a widow to sell a former founding shareholder's shares back to the corporation pursuant to the terms contained in the buy/sell agreement.
After a seven-week trial, obtained a defense verdict on behalf of sellers of a business to a private equity firm that sued the sellers for fraud, rescission, and breach of contract in connection with the sale of the business. A favorable verdict was also obtained on behalf of the sellers on their cross-complaint.
After a six-week trial, a complete defense verdict was obtained on behalf of an assisted living facility in an action by its former director and two employees claiming constructive discharge.
Obtained summary judgment on behalf of an auto manufacturer in a wrongful death lawsuit alleging the decedent's automobile had a defectively designed brake system.
Obtained summary judgment on behalf of purchasers of a messengering and reprographics business in an action seeking to enforce a covenant not to compete that was given by the seller of the business who started a competing business shortly after he sold the business. The Court ruled that the covenant not to compete was enforceable, which resulted in a favorable settlement for the clients.