After more than four years of being subjected to unjust litigation, negative campaigns, and threats, Serviam by Wright LLP has won another victory against the frivolous claims filed against them in the Morales v. City of Indio case, which has been driven by an anti-government special interest group out of Virginia, the Institute for Justice. This time, the Fourth Appellate District, Division Two Court of Appeals of the State of California, unanimously upheld the judgment for Serviam by Wright LLP by the trial court and rejected all of the Institute for Justice’s baseless allegations.
While the Institute for Justice and some newspapers attempted to fabricate a case in the “court of public opinion,” in the court of law and with the evidence in full view, the false claims against Serviam by Wright LLP were completely debunked.
Before Serviam by Wright LLP won the lawsuit in the trial court, the Institute for Justice and the plaintiffs tried to dismiss the law firm from the case rather than allow judgment to be entered for Serviam by Wright LLP. However, the law firm opposed dismissal, instead seeking full exoneration on the evidence and law, which it successfully obtained – twice.
The summary of the unanimous findings by the Court of Appeals, which can be proven with court documents, is as follows:
- The Appellate Court states that “We have no idea why this appeal is here,” one of several statements by the Appellate Justices to the effect that the lawsuit itself and the appeal were baseless.
- The Appellate Court agreed with the trial court granting Serviam by Wright LLP a summary judgment in the Morales v. City of Indio case. This decision effectively exonerated Serviam by Wright LLP from the false claims against them that the law firm was “policing for profit,” i.e., it had a financial interest in the cases it prosecuted on behalf of Indio and Coachella. As the firm has said all along, this was patently false.
- The Appellate Court highlighted numerous inconsistencies in the arguments filed by the appellant regarding the status of Serviam by Wright LLP in a feeble attempt to circumvent the law and due process.
- The Appellate Court held that Morales, the other plaintiffs, and their driving force, the Institute for Justice, failed to present evidence to support their claims against Serviam by Wright LLP, as well as the two cities. Thus, judgment for Serviam by Wright LLP was just and proper.
- The Appellate Court highlighted the bad-faith and unscrupulous tactics by appellant and the Institute for Justice, calling their tactics, “‘Heads, I win; tails, you lose’; she could keep [Serviam by Wright LLP] in the action as long as she wanted, but if [the law firm] sought any relief, such as summary judgment, it would suddenly (and retroactively) become a nonparty,” as well as citing their untrue representations of the law.
- The Appellate Court upheld the finding that the claims against Serviam by Wright LLP were “meritless” and that the law firm is the prevailing party in this lawsuit.
This ruling highlights the Appellate Court’s recognition of the hardships faced by Serviam by Wright LLP in their effort to clear their names from such a pointless lawsuit.
Overall, the decision rendered by the Appellate Court effectuated Serviam by Wright’s dismissal from the predatory actions of the filers of senseless lawsuits. Throughout their five-year ordeal with this lawsuit, Serviam by Wright LLP maintained itself as a reputable law firm dedicated to facilitating justice, order, and fairness and valuing evidence over defamatory sensationalism. The false narrative and misleading perception perpetuated by this lawsuit does not reflect the reality of the law firm’s mission and practice, nor the law or even reality. The law firm is determined to move on from the defamation and threats brought by the Institute of Justice’s lawsuit and is focused on serving the public in a manner aligned with its values giving value to communities and the law itself.
