Katz v. Rosen

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtCHRISTIAN; CALDECOTT, P.J., and EMERSON
Citation48 Cal.App.3d 1032,121 Cal.Rptr. 853
PartiesDavid H. KATZ, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. John D. ROSEN, Defendant and Respondent. Civ. 35300.
Decision Date10 June 1975

Page 853

121 Cal.Rptr. 853
48 Cal.App.3d 1032
David H. KATZ, Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.
John D. ROSEN, Defendant and Respondent.
Civ. 35300.
Court of Appeal, First District, Division 4, California.
June 10, 1975.
Rehearing Denied June 30, 1975.
Hearing Denied Aug. 6, 1975.

[48 Cal.App.3d 1034]

Page 854

Leland C. Spiegelman, San Francisco, for plaintiff and appellant.

Petris & Vasil, Fremont, for defendant and respondent.

CHRISTIAN, Associate Justice.

David Katz appeals from a summary judgment dismissing his complaint for libel against John Rosen.

The declarations supporting and opposing the motion for summary judgment are not in factual conflict. Curtis Freund, an attorney, was retained by Madalyn Honig early in 1970 to represent her in a personal injury action. Freund hired Dr. John Rosen, the respondent herein, to perform a medical examination of Miss Honig and to write a report regarding the extent of her injuries. Respondent performed these services and charged $56 and $100 for the examination and report, respectively. Appellant was subsequently substituted as attorney for Miss Honig in the personal injury action. Appellant and Freund agreed that Freund was to receive one third of any attorney's fees received by appellant for his representation of Miss Honig; respondent's fees were to be paid by Miss Honig upon recovery in the personal injury action. Miss Honig's personal injury claim was settled in May 1972. While the $56 fee for the medical examination was promptly paid, Miss Honig asserted a right of setoff as to the $100 charged for the report, claiming that she had performed housekeeping services of equal value for respondent. Respondent denied that Miss Honig had rendered any services to him, and sought the assistance of the San Francisco Bar Association to induce appellant to pay. He at first rejected a recommendation by a member of the San Francisco Bar Association's Medical-Legal Subcommitted to settle his claim for $50.

[48 Cal.App.3d 1035] Appellant then exerted pressure on Freund to bring about a settlement between Miss Honig and respondent. While admitting that Freund was entitled to the agreed share of attorney's fees, appellant

Page 855

repeatedly refused to remit as long as Freund was unable to persuade respondent to accept a compromise. Freund explained his predicament to respondent. Out of consideration for Freund, respondent reluctantly agreed to the compromise which had been proposed. He thereafter wrote the following letter to the San Francisco Bar Association complaining of appellant's conduct:

August 23, 1972

San Francisco Bar Association

222 Montgomery

San Francisco, California

Gentlemen:

I am writing this letter as a result of a most perturbing situation which arose recently, and I hope you may be able to offer some guidance. In brief, at the request of an attorney acquaintance of mine, Curtis A. Freund, I examined a patient, Miss Madelyn Honig, in connection with injuries received in a 1968 automobile accident. My fee for the examination was paid, but Mr. Freund asked me to wait for payment for the medical report until settlement of the case. I agreed, although it is not by usual practice. My fee for the medical report was $100.00.

Subsequently, Mr. David H. Katz, a San Francisco attorney, took over the case from Mr. Freund with an arrangement for payment on settlement to Mr. Freund for services rendered to that time. The case was settled a few months ago, but I was informed by Mr. Freund that Mr. Katz would not pay him his agreed fee unless I reduced my charge for the medical report to $50.00. I contacted the Bar Association at that time, and was advised by Miss Ollie Marie-Victoire that my fee was reasonable and should not be reduced under the circumstances. Mr. Freund fully concurred in this.

Nonetheless, Mr. Katz persisted in refusing to pay either me or Mr. Freund our fees unless I reduced mine by half....

To continue reading

Request your trial
34 practice notes
  • Practice and procedure: Patent and trademark cases rules of practice; representation of others before Patent and Trademark Office,
    • United States
    • Federal Register December 12, 2003
    • December 12, 2003
    ...127 Ariz. 122, 618 P.2d 616 (Ct. App. Div 1 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 967, 101 S.Ct. 1484, 67 L. Ed. 2d 616 (1981); Katz v. Rosen, 48 Cal. App. 3d 1032, 121 Cal. Rptr. 853 (1st. Dist. 1975); Field v. Kearns, 43 Conn. App. 265, 682 A.2d 148 (1996), cert. denied, 239 Conn. 942, 684 A.2d 7......
  • Part II
    • United States
    • Federal Register December 12, 2003
    • December 12, 2003
    ...127 Ariz. 122, 618 P.2d 616 (Ct. App. Div 1 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 967, 101 S.Ct. 1484, 67 L. Ed. 2d 616 (1981); Katz v. Rosen, 48 Cal. App. 3d 1032, 121 Cal. Rptr. 853 (1st. Dist. 1975); Field v. Kearns, 43 Conn. App. 265, 682 A.2d 148 (1996), cert. denied, 239 Conn. 942, 684 A.2d 7......
  • Hecimovich v. Encinal Sch. Parent Teacher Org., No. A130852.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • February 9, 2012
    ...of hatred or ill will going beyond that which the occasion for the communication apparently justified....’ ” ( Katz v. Rosen (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 1032, 1037, 121 Cal.Rptr. 853.) To defeat a SLAPP motion, plaintiff must overcome substantive defenses ( Gerbosi v. Gaims, Weil, West & Epstein, ......
  • Klem v. Access Ins. Co., D070623
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • November 20, 2017
    ...does not apply to communications insufficiently related to investigation or remedy of wrongdoing. (See, e.g., Katz v. Rosen (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 1032, 1037, 121 Cal.Rptr. 853 ( Katz ) [absolute privilege did not apply to letter to local bar association regarding attorney conduct, explaining......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
32 cases
  • Hecimovich v. Encinal Sch. Parent Teacher Org., No. A130852.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • February 9, 2012
    ...of hatred or ill will going beyond that which the occasion for the communication apparently justified....’ ” ( Katz v. Rosen (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 1032, 1037, 121 Cal.Rptr. 853.) To defeat a SLAPP motion, plaintiff must overcome substantive defenses ( Gerbosi v. Gaims, Weil, West & Epstein, ......
  • Klem v. Access Ins. Co., D070623
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • November 20, 2017
    ...does not apply to communications insufficiently related to investigation or remedy of wrongdoing. (See, e.g., Katz v. Rosen (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 1032, 1037, 121 Cal.Rptr. 853 ( Katz ) [absolute privilege did not apply to letter to local bar association regarding attorney conduct, explaining......
  • Stamas v. County of Madera, Case No. CV F 09–0753 LJO SMS.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • June 14, 2011
    ...investigation). A statement must be made to an official agency having the power to address the complaint made. Katz v. Rosen, 48 Cal.App.3d 1032, 121 Cal.Rptr. 853 (1975) (letter to local bar association complaining of an attorneys alleged unethical conduct). Official proceedings include pr......
  • Hecimovich v. Encinal Sch. Parent Teacher Org., No. A130852.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • April 25, 2012
    ...of hatred or ill will going beyond that which the occasion for the communication apparently justified....’ ” ( Katz v. Rosen (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 1032, 1037, 121 Cal.Rptr. 853.) To defeat a SLAPP motion, plaintiff must overcome substantive defenses ( Gerbosi v. Gaims, Weil, West & Epstein, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT