Carl Blumenstein specializes in complex business litigation, primarily insurance coverage, antitrust, and employment law disputes. For more than 20 years, he has provided counsel and representation to clients in trial and appellate courts and in myriad disputes.
On behalf of policyholders, he has obtained millions of dollars of insurance recoveries for environmental, employment, and intellectual property matters. Presently, he is representing one of the world's leading manufacturers of TFT-LCD panels in a nationally high-profile criminal and civil antitrust proceeding. His employment law experience includes representing private and public entities and individual employees in disputes involving wrongful termination, discrimination and harassment, disability, drug testing, trade secret misappropriation, and violations of constitutional law. Over the past decade, Mr. Blumenstein, a user-friendly neutral, has mediated more than 50 civil disputes.
Mr. Blumenstein clerked for the Honorable Charles A. Legge, District Judge of the United States District Court in San Francisco, and also for the Honorable Daral G. Conklin, United States Magistrate for the District of Hawaii.
Goleta Water District v. Slippery Rock Ranch, LLC. Successfully tried high-profile water rights dispute, in behalf of public water district, to defeat attempted private appropriation of water resources.
United States v. AU Optronics. Represents leading global manufacturer of TFT-LCD panels in multi-billion dollar antitrust prosecution.
In re TFT-LCD Antitrust Litigation. Represents global manufacturer of TFT-LCD panels in complex multi-district antitrust litigation and related opt-out and state enforcement proceedings. Defended client in five-week trial against nationwide retailer. Litigating cutting-edge issues in circuit courts and U.S Supreme Court.
Aerojet-General Corp. v. Fidelity & Casualty Ins. Co. Represented policyholder in action seeking reimbursement of defense and indemnity expense in connection with allegations of chemical releases arising from TCE (and other VOCs), NDMA and perchlorate exposure at and near Azusa site.
Aerojet-General Corp. v. Transport Indemnity Co. (17 Cal. 4th 38 (1997)) Represented policyholder in appeals seeking reimbursement of defense and indemnity expense in connection with historical chemical releases at Sacramento site. Obtained landmark appellate decision, holding that investigative expenses are recoverable as defense expenses.
Aerojet-General Corporation v. Transcontinental Ins. Co. Represented policyholder. This case of first impression under California law adjudicated the circumstances by which settlements with primary insurers would establish policy exhaustion in a case involving continuing environmental loss.
LSI Corporation. Successfully defended high-tech client in an alleged breach of a lease agreement. After prevailing on summary adjudication motion, case proceeded to trial, and client obtained affirmative recovery.
American States Water Co. v. Aerojet-General Corp. Defended aerospace manufacturer against utility's claims arising from alleged chemical contamination of groundwater.
Children's Hospital and Research Center, Oakland v. WCAB, 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 8027. Successfully invoked statutory and constitutional privacy protections to obtain Court of Appeal decision to maintain confidentiality of medical files of HIV-infected children.
Photon Dynamics, Inc. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. Filed lawsuit against D&O and EPL insurers and successfully recovered defense expenses after high-tech client obtained jury verdict on securities and misrepresentation claims in lawsuit by former officer.
City of Richmond v. Levin Enterprises. Pursued insurers who provided coverage dating back over 40 years and successfully obtained nearly complete recovery of settlement and defense expenses incurred by client—all without filing litigation.
Trend Micro. Obtained insurance reimbursement for litigation expenses, without filing lawsuit, in high-stakes patent infringement litigation for a software manufacturer.
Assisted semiconductor manufacturer in coverage disputed under technical errors and omissions policy.
Successfully asserted owners' rights and obtained a settlement from the title insurer, without filing suit, when owners of a historically significant live-work space learned that the title policy had failed to disclose a 100-year old deed that threatened rights to access the property.
Represented high-tech client in successfully obtaining insurance coverage under a technical errors and omissions policy for product-related claims asserted by an international customer.