Michael Yoder

Backed by a long record of trial and arbitration wins, Michael Yoder handles a wide range of complex matters, including securities, mergers and acquisitions, licensing disputes, unfair competition, professional liability defense, business torts, insurance, contract, real estate, land use, and general commercial disputes. His deep experience enables him to provide strategic guidance to clients at every stage of litigation and in settling matters out of court.

Mike is a Fellow of the prestigious American College of Trial Lawyers and has been featured in the National Law Journal’s special report, “Winning: Successful Strategies from the Nation's Top Litigators.” Mike was named Best Lawyers®’ Orange County Bet-the-Company Litigation “Lawyer of the Year” in its 2013 and 2019 rankings. He also has been recognized consistently as one of Orange County's “Top 50 Lawyers” in Law & Politics Media Inc.’s annual surveys, which are published in Los Angeles magazine.

Representative Experience as Lead Trial and Arbitration Counsel

• Most recently, Mike obtained a complete victory following a four-month bench trial defending Johnson & Johnson in a suit by Los Angeles, Orange, and Santa Clara counties and the City of Oakland seeking $50 billion in damages, alleging that Mike’s client and three other manufacturers violated public-nuisance laws by causing an opioid epidemic through misleading marketing and promotion of their medications. Mike served as first chair trial lawyer for Johnson & Johnson, and also led the joint defense group, with his team taking the lead on briefing and argument for all defendants on critical issues. The Daily Journal recognized the decision as one of the top verdicts of 2021.
• A complete victory for Samsung in a breach-of-contract case after stepping in just eight weeks before trial to assist existing counsel. The case became all the more challenging when the judge granted partial summary judgment for the plaintiff on all liability issues, finding that Samsung materially breached an agreement to supply memory chips. In the three-day trial, focused solely on damages, Mike neutralized the attacks on Samsung and effectively exposed and dismantled the assumptions behind the plaintiff’s damages theory.
• A victory in a month-long trial in the Los Angeles Superior Court in which Mike served as lead trial counsel for the owners of a major manufacturing company who were sued for over $50 million for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, intentional interference and aiding and abetting relating to a claimed joint venture agreement. One of Mike's clients was dismissed after plaintiffs rested their case, the jury returned a complete verdict for another of Mike's clients, and the plaintiffs' claims against the third client for fraud and punitive damages were rejected by the jury, which awarded only limited damages against Mike's client. 
• The successful defense of the sponsor/manager of five major commercial real estate investment funds in a month-long arbitration evidentiary hearing in which the claimant / investors sought over $300 million in damages. In an interim award, the arbitrator rejected the claimant / investors’ claims for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud and denied all but of a fraction of the derivative claims brought on behalf of the investment funds. 
• A complete victory on behalf of the same sponsor/manager in a week-long arbitration evidentiary hearing in which a broker claimed a right to a share of "back end" profits earned by the funds and sought damages exceeding $20 million. The arbitrator found in our client's favor and awarded our client nearly half a million dollars in attorneys' fees.
• A complete victory on behalf of four commercial real estate investment funds in a three-week arbitration in which the funds’ former manager sought over $60 million in a claimed “back end” profit share. The arbitrator rejected the former manager’s claims and awarded the funds over a half million dollars in damages for improper payments the former fund manager made to himself, and further awarded the funds over $2 million in attorneys’ fees.
• A jury verdict after a three-week trial in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in which Mike represented a major surfwear company and obtained a permanent injunction against a competitor, the jury finding both willful trademark infringement and intentional trademark dilution.
• For that same client, another jury verdict in a three-week jury trial in the U.S. District Court in the Central District of California on claims for trademark infringement and false designation of origin. The court entered a permanent injunction requiring the defendant to phase out all use of its competing trademark.
• Also for that same client, another jury verdict in a two-week trial in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The jury found defendants guilty of willful trademark infringement and intentional trademark dilution, and the Court issued a permanent injunction restricting defendants' use of their competing mark.
• Also for that same client, a complete victory in a two-week arbitration evidentiary hearing involving claims that Mike’s client breached a license and royalty agreement with the claimant relating to legendry skateboarder "Tony Hawk" trademarks. The arbitrator denied all of claimant's claims and awarded Mike’s client its attorneys' fees.
• Also for that same client, a jury verdict in a two-week jury trial in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in which the plaintiff asserted claims for breach of a licensing agreement and sought over $50 million in damages. The jury in its verdict denied all of the plaintiff's claims and awarded Mike’s client over $5 million in damages on its cross-complaint.
• A jury verdict after a seven-week jury trial in Orange County Superior Court, in which Mike defended an AmLaw 25 firm and one of its estate planning partners in a legal malpractice action. Mike was able to cut the claimed damages down from over US$15 million to slightly under US$7 million, and persuaded the court to grant a motion for nonsuit as to one of three of the plaintiffs' claims. The jury found in defendants' favor on all remaining claims.