Douglas J. Pettibone Obtains a 12-0 Defense Verdict Using “Empty Chair Defense” for a Client Accused of Investment Fraud

Douglas J. Pettibone obtains a 12-0 defense verdict using “empty chair defense” for a client accused of investment fraud.

Orange County, CA (PRWEB) August 09, 2011

Douglas J. Pettibone obtains a 12-0 defense verdict using “empty chair defense” for a client accused of investment fraud.

Pettibone represented a client accused of taking investor funds in a multi-million dollar investment for the development of storage units in Murrieta, California (Linhard vs. Storage US et. al., OCSC Case No: 06CC 10085).

A group of investors in the project filed suit against a host of named defendants including accountants, contractors and an attorney for fraud, securities violations and punitive damages including return of the investor’s 3 million dollar investment.

Pettibone’s client, the real estate agent on the transaction, was the only remaining defendant at the time the case went to trial. The other defendants settled, filed bankruptcy or just did not appear in court.

“The real culprits were the parties who never appeared in court and filed for bankruptcy,” Pettibone said arguing the “empty chair defense.” Under the empty chair defense a defendant attempts to point the finger at the empty chair of the person or persons who were not present in court.

Pettibone says his client was a victim just like the other investors. It just so happens she was the only person on the defense side when the case went to trial that appeared to have “deep pockets”. Deep pocket is an American slang for a defendant with extensive wealth or resources.

“Since jury trials are about uncovering the truth, here the truth was uncovered,” Pettibone said. “Just because a person has wealth does not make them liable although that seems often times the motivating factor for filing a case.”

###