State Supreme Court Allows Lawyer to Be Sued Over Tactics

The state Supreme Court on Thursday refused to give lawyers wider protection against lawsuits over the tactics they employ in a case.

The justices ruled unanimously that an Irvine lawyer may be sued on charges that he aided his clients in the unlawful recording of confidential telephone calls for use as evidence in their lawsuit.

The court concluded that such conduct was not protected by the so-called “litigation privilege,” which has been recognized in California since 1872. Such privilege grants lawyers and litigants broad immunity from lawsuits during legal proceedings, although they still may be prosecuted for crimes.

The justices rejected contentions by the accused attorney that denying him immunity would invite frivolous lawsuits against lawyers and discourage them from zealously representing their clients.

The case arose after three residents of the Country Club Mobile Manor, a mobile-home park in Santa Ana, decided in 1983 to sell their homes. A dispute ensued with the park managers over whether the homes could be sold without certain repairs being made.

According to court documents, the three residents allegedly secretly tape-recorded their conversations with the managers. The tapes then allegedly were transcribed by the residents’ attorney, Richard Farnell of Irvine.

An Orange County Superior Court judge dismissed the managers’ suit, concluding that the litigation privilege protected Farnell and the residents. The case then went to trial, the tapes were admitted into evidence over the managers’ objection and the jury awarded the residents $570,000 in damages.

A state Court of Appeal, however, reinstated the managers’ invasion of privacy suit, and on Thursday the state high court upheld the appeals court’s ruling.