Michael Thornton is a litigation partner who has practiced law for over 20 years. His practice focuses on complex business litigation matters and he has substantial trial experience. Mr. Thornton has substantial experience investigating and litigating professional malpractice matters, including accountant and attorney malpractice cases. He has also worked on large cases involving mortgage fraud and complex accounting issues.
Mr. Thornton has an eminent domain and condemnation litigation practice representing both public entity and private clients and he has successfully handled inverse condemnation matters. He is also a healthcare litigator who litigates in peer review proceedings and in court and he has extensive experience in construction defect, products liability, environmental and insurance coverage litigation.
Mr. Thornton has successfully mediated many cases on behalf of clients and believes that alternative dispute resolution should be explored as a way of successfully achieving the client's goals.
Prior to joining Nossaman, Mr. Thornton served two years as a judicial law clerk for the United States Court of Appeal for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia and was Judicial Extern for the Honorable Spencer M. Williams of the United States District Court.
He was recognized by San Francisco magazine in 2004 as a Northern California "Super Lawyer" in Business Litigation and was selected as one of the Best Land Use Lawyers in the Bay Area by Bay Area Lawyer Magazine in January of 2006. Additionally, Mr. Thornton is AV rated by Martindale-Hubbell.
Representative Work
Federal Deposit Insurance Company. Leads a team investigating audits performed by a major accounting firm for a failed bank during the years 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. The investigation is scrutinizing the audits performed by the accounting firm to determine whether the FDIC, which was named as conservator of the failed bank, should pursue and litigate claims of accounting malpractice against the accounting firm. Mr. Thornton is working with highly experienced accounting experts in this high profile matter for the FDIC.
Pankow v. Bley. Represented the former client of an attorney in an attorney malpractice case involving the formation of a partnership in which the attorney represented both of the parties forming the partnership. The case was successfully settled for the plaintiff on the eve of trial.
Medical Executive Committee of Washington Township Hospital. Represented the Committee In Eight Unnamed Physicians v. Medical Executive Committee of Washington Township Hospital. The California Court of Appeal by published opinion reversed an order of the Alameda County Superior Court which directed the Committee to consolidate eight separate hearings it had arranged for eight physicians who abandoned the hospital's anesthesia services as a group between a two-day period of time. The appellate court observed that the Superior Court was without jurisdiction to "micromanage" the administrative process and that the physicians could not expect to receive a "group discount" for the cost of their litigation. This was a strong victory for the rule that the courts cannot interfere with the administrative process until it has run its course.
International Paper v. Affiliated FM. Served as co-counsel on this insurance recovery action arising out of the failure of 22 insurance carriers to defend and indemnify International Paper for damages paid in settlement of a 1998 national class action lawsuit involving hardboard siding. The San Francisco jury in this matter returned a verdict of $383 million in July of 2003.
Montana Refining Company v. National Union Insurance Company. Represented Montana Refining, an oil refining company, in an action for declaratory relief seeking coverage for CERCLA claims.
Marin Advisors Investors II v. California Department of Transportation. Lead attorney in this case involving an inverse condemnation claim by our client against Caltrans arising from Caltrans' use of our client's property during the seismic retrofit construction on Highway 101 and the partial taking of our client's parking lot. This case was settled on the eve of trial.
State of California v. B.H. & B.N. Woodson Family Trust, et al. Second chair in jury trial where Nossaman represented the property owner in a condemnation action brought by Caltrans. The primary issues were the fair market value of our client's property being taken for a freeway widening project and the highest and best use of the property. After a 10 day jury trial, a verdict was returned in favor of our client for the full amount we requested.
Contra Costa Transportation Authority. Provides advice and assistance to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority on condemnation and eminent domain issues - all of which to date have been resolved favorably either through negotiations or at trial.
Las Galinas Valley Sanitary District v. Anthony F. Silveira et al. Won one of the largest jury verdicts ($14.6 million) ever obtained in Marin County Superior Court. Our client, the Silveira family, had owned a 364 acre ranch. A nearby sanitary district sought to condemn a significant portion of the ranch - - much of which would otherwise have been suitable for residential and mixed use development. The District tried to preempt any future development plans, and would have robbed much of the ranch of value. Nossaman lawyers won a three-week jury trial so convincingly that the district abandoned the condemnation and paid the Silviera family's litigation expenses. The verdict reportedly represents the largest condemnation jury verdict in the State in several years.
City of San Ramon. Co-lead on the team representing the City of San Ramon in an inverse condemnation case brought by the owner of a tire store who claimed that road construction by the City had interrupted his business and impaired his access to it. The matter was decided in favor of our client in Superior Court.
Valley Estates Mobile Home Park. Successfully represented the owners of this mobile home park in an eminent domain action. The park owners were faced with losing a portion of their business and land to the Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for a Napa River flood control project. The district originally offered $2,140,000.00 for the property. Nossaman negotiated a $4.3 million dollar settlement for the land owners.