Joseph Franklin KlattThe La Jolla Lawyer
- Business Law, Legal Malpractice, Civil Rights ...
Joseph F. Klatt is a veteran California litigator with demonstrated expertise representing individual and institutional clients in complex civil litigation matters. He is skilled in handling all facets of litigation, including initiating and planning a case, managing discovery, drafting dispositive motions and briefs, conducting depositions, trying and resolving cases, handling complex writs and appeals, and negotiating significant settlements in high stakes cases. He is recognized for handling complex, unique, and troublesome cases, providing innovative litigation strategies, looking at legal issues from multiple and unorthodox angles, and cost-effectively achieving his clients’ objectives.
Joseph was the Valedictorian of his law school class at the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, as well as the Editor-in-Chief of the McGeorge Law Review. While in law school he received Witkin awards for achieving the highest marks in over half of his graded units, including Contracts, Torts, Property, Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law, Bioethics, Environmental Law, and Legal Process (Research and Writing). Joseph was voted the Outstanding Graduating Senior by the faculty, and is a member of the Order of the Coif and the Traynor Society. Joseph was a judicial extern for the Honorable Kimberly J. Mueller of the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of California.
Joseph was born and raised in La Jolla, California, and graduated from the University of California at San Diego with a degree in Cognitive Science with a Specialization in Neuroscience.
- University of California - San Francisco
- B.S. | Cognitive Science with a Specialization in Neuroscience
- University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law
- Honors: Valedictorian; Witkin awards for the highest marks in Contracts I & II, Torts I & II, Civil Procedure I & II, Constitutional Law I & II, Legal Process I & II (Research & Writing), Bioethics, and Environmental Law; voted Outstanding Graduating Senior by the faculty, and is a member of the Order of the Coif and the Traynor Society.
- Activities: Editor-in-Chief of the McGeorge Law Review
- Founder and Owner
- The Law Office of Joseph F. Klatt
- California State Bar  # 258110
- - Current
- State Bar of California
- ID Number: 258110
30 minute free consultation. Additional consultation fees are waived for consults who sign with the firm.
- Business Law
- Business Contracts, Business Dissolution, Business Finance, Business Formation, Business Litigation, Franchising, Mergers & Acquisitions, Partnership & Shareholder Disputes
- Legal Malpractice
- Civil Rights
- Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Discrimination, Employment, Fair Housing, Police Misconduct, Privacy Law
- Real Estate Law
- Commercial Real Estate, Condominiums, Easements, Eminent Domain, Homeowners Association, Land Use & Zoning, Mortgages, Neighbor Disputes, Residential Real Estate, Water Law
- Appeals & Appellate
- Civil Appeals, Federal Appeals
- Lawsuits and Disputes
- English: Spoken, Written
- Q. Is it common for a plaintiff to lose a case when the defendants nor their attorneys appear for a scheduled demurrer.
- A: The Plaintiff likely did not show up because there was no opposition. It is also likely that the Court had made a tentative ruling. In most jurisdictions, if no one calls to contest the tentative, and notifies the court and opposing counsel of its intent to appear, then the tentative becomes final without argument. My guess is the Defendant did not call for a hearing or file a demurrer, and the Plaintiff had no reason to know he was supposed to appear, and the Court was obliged to enter the tentative. Tentative ruling and failure to file an opposition aside, failing to appear to a demurrer hearing is covered by California Rule of Court 3.1320(f): "When a demurrer is regularly called for hearing and one of the parties does not appear, the demurrer must be disposed of on the merits at the request of the party appearing unless for good cause the hearing is continued. Failure to appear in support of a special demurrer may be construed by the court as an admission that the demurrer is not meritorious and as a waiver of all grounds thereof. If neither party appears, the demurrer may be disposed of on its merits or dropped from the calendar, to be restored on notice or on terms as the court may deem proper, or the hearing may be continued to such time as the court orders." The Court was obligated to decide the demurrer on the merits if the Defendant demanded it, or to give a continuance. The Court can but does not have to draw an adverse inference against the Plaintiff for not showing up, and apparently it did not, likely because an opposition was not filed. If I were the Plaintiff, I'd move on and get my amendment filed, presuming the Court gave leave to amend.
- Q. What do you do when Plaintiff's are trying to get documents from Defendants website, and they cant get it.?
- A: You need to utilize the discovery process. You do not have to have a trial date set to start discovery. A Plaintiff can start discovery 10 days after the Complaint is served and up until the discovery cutoff date, which is a fixed number of days before trial. No trial date, no cutoff. If the Plaintiff has been fighting for years and not done any discovery, then the Plaintiff is misusing the legal process to his own detriment, and should consider getting an attorney. Any decent civil litigator can discovery started in just a few days.
- Q. How do I get a attorney free for ilegal eviction? Utilities shut off and locks changed.
- A: You likely will not find one for free. You may, however, be able to find one that will take your case on contingency. You want to look for a local tenant's lawyer and ask for a consultation.
- The Law Office of Joseph F. Klatt