Litigation

Lozano Smith's Litigation Practice Group offers its clients a long history of dedicated and successful representation. The litigation group is highly regarded in the legal community and in the judiciary, even being selected by superior court judges to pursue lawsuits on their behalf. Lozano Smith has successfully represented districts at all levels of state and federal jurisdiction, on such diverse matters as personnel disputes, civil rights, personal injury, environmental issues and fee mitigation measures. The firm has earned favorable decisions for clients in numerous administrative hearings involving grievances, unfair practice charges, layoffs and dismissals, arbitrations, expulsions, and special education.

The firm's approach is to work in partnership with clients, regularly communicating the status of the case, with an eye toward cost containment, and toward keeping clients informed of the progress of their case. When litigation is undertaken, a case budget is prepared, the client's approval is obtained for that budget and regular communication is maintained to keep the client informed of the status of the case as it is proceeding.

We support and encourage clients to consider alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures in appropriate cases. Our firm is experienced and well versed in various forms of ADR, including arbitration, mediation and both informal and formal settlement conferences. Examples of successful litigation include:

• Obtaining $14.2 million in driver training monies for school districts throughout the state. ( Salinas Union High School Dist. v. Honig (1992) 5 Cal. Rptr. 626.)
• Helping define the legal principle that plaintiffs suing school districts must first comply with the Tort Claims Act. ( Dilts v. Cantua Elementary School Dist. (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 27.)
• Successfully defending a county superintendent of schools against civil rights litigation, establishing that a county office of education is a state agency entitled to Eleventh Amendment protection. ( Eaglesmith v. Ward (9th Cir. 1995) 73 F.3d 857.)
• Settlement of Special Education Mandated Cost Claim providing all school districts, county offices, and SELPAs with $520 million in retroactive general fund reimbursement and $100 million as a permanent increase to the A.B. 602 base funding special education programs and services. (Education Code sections 56836.156 and 56836.157.)
• Successful representation of the Education Mandated Cost Network and member districts in recovery of costs associated with teacher salaries arising from mandated science courses. ( San Diego U.S.D. v. Commission on State Mandates, Sacramento Sup. Ct. Case No. 03 CS 01401.)