David Larkin
N/A
Licensed for 40 years
Law Degree
Awards
Primary Practice Area
Business
Language
English
About
I have been a lawyer since 1981. I have been a transactions lawyer for most of my 37 year career and was a trial lawyer for 30 years. I have drafted hundreds of contracts in my transaction work and I have litigated employment and business disputes. I was a CPA in the early 80s and practiced business transaction and securities work in Beverly Hills in the 80s. I have a facility with financial matters and disputes. With this trial experience and business background, I am well equipped to counsel individuals and small businesses in contract and organization matters. Three recent trials resulted in $110,000 arbitration award in 2012 on sex discrimination and harassment case, $1,076,000 jury verdict in 2012 on breach of fiduciary duty claim by member of a limited liability company against another member (reversed on appeal), and a $414,000 jury verdict in 2013 against the US Postal Service on a Title VII retaliation claim. In January 2018, I ended my trial practice and now concentrate on business transaction work and consulting on employment issues and contract and small business corporation and limited liability matters.
Practices Areas
Business
Employment and labor
Language
English
Contact
Reviews
Mr. Larkin has represented our company on more than one occasion. Once we were wrongfully sued by former employees. Mr. Larkin put forth a strong counter claim on our behalf, and the case was ultimately dropped. On a separate occasion, Mr. Larkin defended us against a frivolous lawsuit from former business partners. He developed a very strong counter claim for approximately $600,000. It was a two week jury trial. Mr. Larkin's counter claim was so strong, that the jury awarded us more than double our claim, $1.3 million. An appellant court overturned the judgement on a technicality later, and advised that we could retry the case under a claim of unjust enrichment. That has not yet taken place, but it does not take the luster off of our initial $1.3 million judgement.
Mr. Larkin has represented our company on more than one occasion. Once we were wrongfully sued by former employees. Mr. Larkin put forth a strong counter claim on our behalf, and the case was ultimately dropped. On a separate occasion, Mr. Larkin defended us against a frivolous lawsuit from former business partners. He developed a very strong counter claim for approximately $600,000. It was a two week jury trial. Mr. Larkin's counter claim was so strong, that the jury awarded us more than double our claim, $1.3 million. An appellant court overturned the judgement on a technicality later, and advised that we could retry the case under a claim of unjust enrichment. That has not yet taken place, but it does not take the luster off of our initial $1.3 million judgement.
Mr. Larkin has represented our company on more than one occasion. Once we were wrongfully sued by former employees. Mr. Larkin put forth a strong counter claim on our behalf, and the case was ultimately dropped. On a separate occasion, Mr. Larkin defended us against a frivolous lawsuit from former business partners. He developed a very strong counter claim for approximately $600,000. It was a two week jury trial. Mr. Larkin's counter claim was so strong, that the jury awarded us more than double our claim, $1.3 million. An appellant court overturned the judgement on a technicality later, and advised that we could retry the case under a claim of unjust enrichment. That has not yet taken place, but it does not take the luster off of our initial $1.3 million judgement.
Mr. Larkin has represented our company on more than one occasion. Once we were wrongfully sued by former employees. Mr. Larkin put forth a strong counter claim on our behalf, and the case was ultimately dropped. On a separate occasion, Mr. Larkin defended us against a frivolous lawsuit from former business partners. He developed a very strong counter claim for approximately $600,000. It was a two week jury trial. Mr. Larkin's counter claim was so strong, that the jury awarded us more than double our claim, $1.3 million. An appellant court overturned the judgement on a technicality later, and advised that we could retry the case under a claim of unjust enrichment. That has not yet taken place, but it does not take the luster off of our initial $1.3 million judgement.