Commercial disputes involving complex issues of contract interpretation, regulatory compliance, unfair competition, and agreements among business partners are an inescapable part of business operation. Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld brings to these cases the sophisticated capabilities associated with large firms, with the competitive advantage that comes from lawyers who work closely with their clients on creative approaches to trial strategy.

Our lawyers have both the experience and resources to meet the complex litigation needs of large national and multi-national corporations, as well as those of small to mid-sized companies and individuals, from pre-litigation negotiation through appeal. In every case we constantly monitor and assess the costs and benefits of litigation and the prospects of settlement. Getting results is our prime consideration. We handle all types of commercial disputes, including many mentioned in other of our practice area descriptions. Here we mention only several of the areas and cases not included in other practice areas in which we focus:

  • We work directly with the senior management and in-house counsel of public and private organizations on commercial disputes. Our work includes protecting client interests through vigorous enforcement of rights under the Uniform Commercial Code in agency contracts, collaboration or consulting agreements, customer service contracts, employment and confidentiality agreements, manufacturing and supply contracts, and warranties. We have represented companies in claims alleging misrepresentation and fraud, arising from complex questions of contract interpretation.
  • We are experienced in contested business dissolution cases involving the members of limited liability companies, limited partnerships, S corporations and a variety of other entities. These cases, involving parties who have intense and long-term business relationships, require sensitivity to many issues besides money damages and business valuation, including rights to intellectual property, trade secrets, customer lists and know-how, as well as the feelings and relationships of the human beings caught up in the dispute.
  • We represent businesses and individuals in a variety of real estate and construction litigation, in matters ranging from eviction and lease disputes to construction and work defect claims – including one of the first reported cases brought against an interior designer. We apply our substantial experience in the mediation and arbitration of disputes involving claims over cost, design error and project management. Our clients in these disputes have included real property owners, managers and lessors.
  • We are experienced in disputes over non-compete agreements often pit employers against each other, particularly where valuable intellectual property assets are involved. We have handled litigation representing both employees’ former and new employers, and are skilled at securing and resisting TROs and permanent injunctions to protect valuable interests in either type of case. We handle trade secret claims involving software, technology, media and business trade secrets, as well as related claims based on unfair competition and common law misappropriation.
  • We represent businesses and individuals in antitrust, Cartwright Act, indirect purchaser, unfair trade practices, unfair competition, trade regulation and trade secret litigation under federal and state statutes in a variety of areas.
  • We assist clients in civil and criminal investigations and cases brought by local federal or state prosecutors, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice, and the California Department of Justice.


  • Ex-Spouse v. Spouse’s Business et al.:  Our clients, two businesswomen and the small business they own, had been sued in superior court by one of the women’s ex-husband for allegedly interfering with his interests in a joint commercial lease. RBGG argued that defendant’s statement to the landlord, informing the landlord of the ex-husband’s threat to evict the women’s business from the office space, was protected pre-litigation speech.  The court agreed and granted a motion RBGG filed under the California Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (“SLAPP”).  The court also found that defendants’ claims, which included intentional interference with contract and intentional and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage, had no probability of success.  As a result, the case was dismissed and defendants recovered significant attorneys’ fees and costs in connection with the motion.
  • Junior Bondholder v. Non-Profit:  The firm represents a non-profit provider of high quality eldercare and its management company in litigation by the holder of a subordinated tax exempt bond in San Francisco Superior Court.  Defendants twice successfully demurred to the complaint and later obtained a stay of the litigation.
  • Shareholders and Directors v. Company:  We represent shareholders and directors of a software company suing in Marin Superior Court for breach of contract and fraud to recover over $1.5 million invested in the company.
  • Former Shareholders v. Corporation: The firm represents a corporation that manages elder care communities in the Bay Area in a dispute over the value of various business holdings upon the departure of two shareholders.
  • Sterling Park v. City of Palo Alto: We secured a victory in the California Supreme Court, which issued a landmark decision cementing our land developer client’s rights to proper notice and an opportunity to be heard when local governments impose special requirements on housing developments. See Sterling Park, L.P v. City of Palo Alto, 57 Cal. 4th 1193 (2013). We later represented the same client in a writ petition to the Court of Appeal arising out of the trial court’s subsequent denial of summary judgment on a statute of limitations issue. The case then settled for a significant sum.
  • Primark Benefits: The firm served as lead counsel for Primark in defense of various actions in state court arising from mergers and acquisitions.
  • Founder v. Former Company:  RBGG assisted a company founder in obtaining a confidential settlement with her former company, the maker of a high-tech corporate communications program.
  • Resmex Partners LLC v. Kimomex Santa Clara LLC: The firm represented a San Jose restaurateur and his group of restaurants in a dispute over the sale of two popular restaurants to a third party. We obtained a favorable settlement on behalf of the clients in the main action and in a related real estate action.
  • Security Associates International:  RBGG helped the company settle a dispute over the purchase of business assets from another corporation.
  • BlueSuit Inc. v. Former Employees:  The firm represented this start-up online brokerage in a dispute with former executives.
  • SpatiaLight Inc.:  The firm assisted this start-up large screen display technology company in the settlement of a commercial dispute.
  • Security Benefit Life Insurance Company:  The firm counseled the company on compliance with disability laws in construction and remodeling of office space.
  • Consulting Firm v. Former Employee:  RBGG successfully represented a small biotech consulting firm that makes cutting edge battery products and medical device parts in a dispute with a shareholder and former executive officer who stole company customer lists and other trade secrets. We obtained a temporary restraining order in Santa Clara Superior Court and later a stipulated confidential injunction protecting the company’s intellectual property.
  • Corporation v. Law Firm:  The firm obtained a confidential settlement on behalf of a corporation in the Bay Area in claims that its long-time counsel failed to disclose conflicts of interest and to offer proper advice concerning a complex series of real estate investment transactions.
  • Software Contractor v. Technology Company:  The firm assisted a software contractor with respect to various issues arising from a complex commercial relationship with a major technology company.
  • Educational Data Systems:  We represented this high-tech educational testing company regarding public contracting issues.
  • Founder v. Start-UP:  The firm represented the co-founder of a Silicon Valley organizational development start-up in a dispute over ownership interest.
  • Equity Properties and Development Company: We were lead counsel in various state court real estate and construction litigation matters, including a trial and successful appeal.
  • Fluor-Daniel Corporation: We were lead counsel representing this construction company in various commercial litigation matters in state court.
  • Software Consulting Vendor v. Fortune 500 Technology Company:  We provided advice and counseling to a software consulting vendor in confidential disputes over deliverables and payments under a complex set of consulting agreements.