Trial Results


Jury Trial, Federal Court
Central District California, Los Angeles
The Honorable Judge Andre Birotte presiding

Pacheco & Neach represented a high net worth couple who owned several learning institutions including a large private college in China. A U.S. corporation, that had purchased and then later sold the college, alleged breach of contract, fraud and other related claims. The US corporation was represented by a stable of attorneys from Texas (3), one from California and lead trial counsel was specifically flown in immediately before the jury trial from New York. Plaintiff sought $30 million plus from P&N clients. P&N was led by lead counsel Rod Pacheco. Brian Neach, Managing Director, handled all pretrial litigation and a host of trial legal issues.

While many witnesses were called during the jury trial, the CEO of the US corporation was the main witness. He had conducted, with the assistance of others, the investigation into the sale of the college and subsequent transactions which Plaintiff claimed reflected the fraudulent nature of all transactions. Plaintiff claimed that those transactions led to the financial demise of a very significant corporation. His testimony was critical to the success or failure of all the Plaintiff’s claims. He was aggressively cross examined by Mr. Pacheco. The trial lasted approximately two weeks.

Result: Unanimous jury verdict in favor of Defendants, P&N clients, on all claims. Of special note, the jury returned their verdicts in one hour, while they were having lunch.


Jury Trial, Federal Court
Central District California, Santa Ana
The Honorable Judge David Carter presiding

Pacheco & Neach represented a California privately held corporation accused of numerous violations of the Clean Waters Act, a federal law regulating and enforcing laws regarding pollutants in the nation’s water systems. The Complaint was filed by a very prominent nonprofit California corporation that had decades of experience suing corporations on these issues. They had never lost a case.

Opposing counsel at the outset made heavy and aggressive demands for settlement monies and extremely restrictive equitable relief while advising that the law was essentially strict liability. The demands by opposing counsel and the nonprofit only increased as pretrial litigation continued, reaching well over one million dollars. Plaintiff also demanded a consent decree against the P&N client.

In what would normally have lasted two weeks, a jury trial in front of Judge Carter was “shoehorned” into one week, with counsel working every day in court from 8 AM through 8 PM. To the inestimable credit of the presiding judge, he worked the hardest.

Plaintiff called a number of witnesses including an expert witness who had been working in the Clean Waters field for decades and was well versed in litigation. He testified unequivocally that the defendant corporation was clearly in violation of several claims made by Plaintiff, not only from his expertise but also from his onsite inspection and other inspections conducted by other Plaintiff personnel. His cross examination was led by Mr. Pacheco, who also handled the cross exam of all other of Plaintiff’s witnesses. Mr. Neach handled all legal issues in the trial and in one remarkable dispute with opposing counsel secured a devastating ruling from the court on the critical legal issue. It was that issue that became the centerpiece of Mr. Pacheco’s closing argument.
In the late afternoon, the day before closing arguments, opposing counsel renewed their last settlement offer claiming that the trial was essentially over after their cross examination of a critical defense expert witness.

Result: Unanimous jury verdict in favor of defendant corporation, P&N client, on all claims. Of special note, it was learned after the verdicts that the jury returned their verdicts in approximately ten (10) minutes before they went to lunch.


Jury Trial, State Court
Riverside County
The Honorable Judge Taylor presiding

Pacheco & Neach represented a high net worth individual who had loaned a close family relative hundreds of thousands of dollars on numerous occasions over a thirty-year period. Unfortunately, that money had never been repaid. Further complicating the matter were issues of statute of limitations, a lack of records of many of the loans, loans that were made by third parties to the client who had then passed it on to the defendants, and a few records that were family made not actual detailed business records. Further exacerbating issues, what records were available contradicted themselves, and given the numerous transactions over a thirty year time period, there were significant failures of recollection by the client and their spouse.

The jury trial lasted well over two weeks with a large number of Plaintiff witnesses called by P&N counsel. Mr. Pacheco and Mr. Neach conducted the trial with the former handling the arguments and witnesses and the latter handling all legal issues before and during trial. Many of Plaintiff’s witnesses were hostile, due to the familial nature of the matter, and needed to be cross examined on direct exam, particularly the main defendant, the brother-in-law of Plaintiff.

Result: Unanimous jury verdicts on 15 out of 18 claims made by Plaintiff, a P&N client, representing the bulk of the outstanding loans.