Krane & Smith

Attorney

Marc Smith

Partner

Krane & Smith
Los Angeles
16255 Ventura Boulevard
Suite 600
Encino, CA 91436

  • (818) 382-4000 - General
  • (818) 382-4001 - Fax

Marc Smith is a member of the California State Bar and licensed to practice law before all California State courts, the United States District Courts for the Central, Southern and Northern Districts of California, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Mr. Smith has both prosecuted and defended major commercial litigation throughout his legal career. He has litigated numerous jury and non-jury trials in both State and Federal Courts and appeared in both State and Federal Appellate Courts and numerous arbitrations. Mr. Smith’s practice focuses on business litigation, real estate law and intellectual property. He has been a Judge Pro Tem in the Los Angeles Superior Court.

Community Involvement

  • Jewish Home for the Aging
  • Leukemia and Lymphoma Society
  • Los Angeles Jewish Federation
  • Fred Hutchinson Cancer Clinic

Trails/Cases

  • Co-trial counsel in a well-publicized trial obtaining a judgment in excess of $100 million involving breach of fiduciary duty in a commercial/probate case through appeal to the California Supreme Court.
  • Co-trial counsel in obtaining a jury verdict in excess of $10 million against an insurance company for bad faith and breach of contract.
  • Lead trial counsel in obtaining a jury verdict in excess of $6.2 million for fraud and violation of the franchise investment law against a prominent national real estate brokerage firm and a defense verdict as to the Cross-Complaint.
  • Lead trial counsel in obtaining a defense jury verdict in favor of a prominent cardiovascular surgeon and professor in a multi-million dollar sexual harassment case.
  • Lead trial counsel regarding the successful representation of lenders to a film company in litigation involving loans in excess of $5 million.
  • Lead trial counsel in obtaining a million dollar jury verdict in two separate legal malpractice actions concerning a real estate dispute and a business transaction.
  • Lead trial counsel in obtaining a jury verdict in excess of $1.0 million against a prominent foreign film distribution company.
  • Lead trial counsel in obtaining a defense verdict in real estate litigation seeking specific performance and damages and an award of $340,000 in attorney fees and costs for trial and appeal.
  • Lead trial counsel in patent ownership and trade secret litigation against interactive media company and secured patent ownership and settlement of the trade secret claims.
  • Co-trial counsel in obtaining a multi-million dollar arbitration award against a prominent independent motion picture company.
  • Lead trial counsel in obtaining a judgment after trial in excess of $4 million in a contractual dispute regarding royalties related to a patent for cardiovascular inventions.
  • Lead trial counsel in obtaining judgment in arbitration concerning ownership of a valuable domain name.
  • Obtained a reversal by the Court of Appeals in an unpublished decision (Gerald Buckberg v. Edwards Lifesciences Research Medical, Inc., Case no. B240053) regarding the trial court's failure to include post judgment interest on the portion of the judgment obtained by Appellant that included prejudgment interest. The Court of Appeal concluded that Appellant was entitled to post judgment interest on prejudgment interest and additional royalties under agreements to pay Appellant royalties for the invention of medical devices used in cardiovascular surgery. The original judgment was in excess of $4.0 million.
  • Obtained a reversal by the Court of Appeals in an unpublished decision of a summary judgment in a legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty case based on the trial court’s error in granting summary judgment on the grounds that Plaintiff’s complaint was time-barred.
  • Lead trial counsel in a multi-party 29-day trial in the Los Angeles Superior Court in 2014, and successfully defended a purchaser’s acquisition of an 8-unit condominium building at a foreclosure sale in an action brought by junior lienholders to cancel the sale and the trustee’s deed to the purchaser.

Reported Appellate Opinions

  • Jogani v. Superior Court, 165 Cal.App.4th 901 (2008). Petition for writ of mandate granted; trial court committed error per se by denying Plaintiff his jury trial right on legal claim for quantum meruit.
  • Filippo Industries, Inc. v. Sun Insurance Company of New York, (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 1728. Certified for partial publication affirming judgment on bad faith insurance verdict in excess of $8.3 million.
  • Uzyel Trusts v. Kadisha, (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 866. Affirming judgment in excess of $100 million for breach of fiduciary duty against trustee of trust.
  • Gary Belz v. Clarendon America Insurance Company, (2007) 158 Cal.App.4th 615. Reversing summary judgment in bad faith insurance case.
  • U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Yashoufar, et al., (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th 639. In an opinion certified for publication, the Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s judgment in excess of $18 million and held that a prepayment fee provision contained in a $62 million note secured by an office building in downtown Los Angeles was not triggered by the Bank’s acceleration of the debt as a result of conflicts in the language contained in the promissory note and in the accompanying deed of trust.
  • Figueroa Tower I, LP v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, No. B255844, 2015 WL 3754846 (Cal.Ct.App. June 16, 2015) In an opinion, the Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s judgment in excess of $82 million and held that a prepayment fee provision contained in a $62 million note secured by an office building in downtown Los Angeles was not triggered by the Bank’s acceleration of the debt as a result of conflicts in the language contained in the promissory note and in the accompanying deed of trust. The Court of Appeal further held that Plaintiffs’ causes of action including breach of contract, wrongful foreclosure and declaratory relief be remanded to the Superior Court.