This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Litigation

Oct. 18, 2001

Big Deal

Cutting clients' losses by settling lawsuits during unproductive discovery is sometimes a good strategy. It could protect them from catastrophic damages at trial, as Brentwood attorney Joseph P. Wohrle discovered last year in one of California's biggest qui tam cases filed since the enactment of Insurance Code Section 1871.7 in 1993.

        By Ed Kimble
        
        Cutting clients' losses by settling lawsuits during unproductive discovery is sometimes a good strategy. It could protect them from catastrophic damages at trial, as Brentwood attorney Joseph P. Wohrle discovered last year in one of California's biggest qui tam cases filed since the enactment of Insu...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up