Trial between brokers is halted

Rare ruling ends case in favor of defendant Coldwell Banker

In a rare move, a judge halted a court battle between Orange County’s top two real estate brokerages, issuing a “directed verdict” in favor of the defendant.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Sheila Recio found that plaintiff First Team Real Estate failed to provide enough evidence during the trial to merit giving the case to the jury.

The Feb. 15 ruling was a humiliating finale to First Team’s sixyear legal battle over massive defections to rival Coldwell Banker from September 2015 to June 2017.

In its lawsuit, First Team accused Coldwell Banker of staging a clandestine campaign to poach about 80 agents and managers, who took with them thumb drives containing “gigabytes” of trade secrets. First Team led the county in home sales when the defections occurred but slipped to No. 2 two behind Coldwell Banker by 2023.

But on the 12th day of First Team’s trial, Recio ordered plaintiffs’ case closed before they presented all their witnesses because their attorneys went over their alotted time, according to court minutes. She then made the uncommon finding that its attorneys failed to present enough evidence to merit jury deliberations.

The ruling dismissed “all claims as to Coldwell Banker Realty and three highly regarded managers,” a Coldwell Banker spokesperson said in a statement.

First Team’s lead attorney issued a statement of his own, disagreeing with Recio’s ruling and vowing to appeal.

“First Team believes that the court should have provided an opportunity for the jury to hear testimony from all of First Team’s available witnesses and consider all of the relevant evidence, and then allow the jury to deliberate and decide the case,” Dan Fears said in a statement. “First Team fully intends to appeal the court’s ruling and pursue all remedies available to it.”

Trial minutes show Fears and

Recio clashed over how long he was taking to present his case to the jury. Fears pleaded for more time, but Recio rejected his request, saying her original 10- to 12-day limit “was a fair trial estimate,” minutes show.

Recio gave First Team to the end of Feb. 14 to finish calling witnesses and rest its case.

`Very rare'

Typically, a judge issues a directed verdict after finding that no reasonable jury could decide in the plaintiff’s favor, according to legal affairs publisher Nolo.com.

But trial attorneys and legal scholars told The Orange County Register that it’s uncommon for a judge to exert that power.

Directed verdicts are “very rare,” said Los Angeles

personal injury lawyer Brian Panish.

Erin Chemerinski, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, noted that judges typically “weed out” weak cases before trial through a “summary judgment,” or a finding that the evidence doesn’t merit going to trial.

“Summary judgments are far more common than directed verdicts,” Chemerinski said in an email. “They usually weed out cases where there is not a factual dispute. … I also think having gone through the trial, judges are inclined to let it go to a verdict. But directed verdicts happen.”

Directed verdicts, “nonsuits” and judgments setting jury verdicts aside “are all rare, but they are not unheard of,” added Bart Williams, a member of the American College of Trial Lawyers who heads the Los Angeles office for the Proskauer law firm.

“Some courts like to wait