Stephen Kaus

Stephen Kaus is a partner at Cooper, White & Cooper LLP.  Mr. Kaus has a broad practice in litigation, having tried approximately 50 matters to verdict.  Chair of the firm's Litigation Department, he handles complex civil and criminal matters, including class actions and multi-district litigation.  As examples, Mr. Kaus has represented clients recently in cases involving alleged business fraud, intellectual property issues, employment law, construction law, anti-trust law, property law, receivership, bankruptcy and taxation.  A substantial portion of his practice involves representation of professionals, including partnership, corporate and professional liability issues.  He previously was co-chair of Cooper's Labor & Employment Practice Group.

In December 2008, Oregon District Court Judge Ancer Haggerty granted a motion to strike under Oregon's SLAPP (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) statute, dismissing a defamation suit against an Internet forum represented by a team of Cooper attorneys led by Mr. Kaus.  Higher Balance LLC v. Quantum Future Group, Inc., 2008 WL 5281487 (D.Ore. 2008).  Judge Haggerty ruled that the online statements concerning a Portland new age guru were not defamatory because they were hyperbole and opinion. 

Also in 2008, Mr. Kaus successfully concluded a five year battle to prevent the California Secretary of State from revoking a client's notary commission.  In late 2007, he settled two matters in which he represented cable telvision entities in disputes with franchising authorities, and major litigation with the City of Oakland on behalf of the developer of a large multi-use project in Oakland's Chinatown.  In March 2006, a Superior Court Judge in Rancho Cucamonga ended a receivership obtained in 2001 by a team of Cooper attorneys led by Mr. Kaus that resulted in a recovery of over $50 million for CWC's clients (see In re Master Home Furniture Company Ltd., 261 B.R. 671 (Bank. Ct. C.D. CA. 2001). 

In other matters, Mr. Kaus headed a successful defense in a False Claims Act (qui tam) case on summary judgment in the Middle District of Pennsylvania (United States ex rel. Paranich v. Sorgnard, et al, 286 F. Supp.2d 445 (M.D. PA, 2003) and successfully defended the judgment on appeal in the Third Circuit (396 F.3d 326 (3rd Cir.2005).  He also successfully defended a judgment over control of a Siikh temple against a charge that it constituted an unconstitutional state action concerning religion (Singh v. Singh (2004) 114 Cal. App.4th 1264). Other published cases include Perdue v. Crocker Bank, 38 Cal.3d 913 (1985) (bank service charge class action), Bank of America v. Cory (1985) 164 Cal.App.3d 66 (relation of Unclaimed Property Law and dormant account service charges), Garcia v. Williams, 704 F.Supp. 984 (N.D. CA. 1988) (wrongful termination), Edwards v. Centex Real Estate Corp. et al(1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 15 (litigation privilege), United States v. Nicoladze, 752 F.2d 1429 (9th Cir. 1985) (criminal guilty verdict set aside for jury misconduct), Young v. County of Marin (1987) 195 Cal.App.3d 863 (termination of county public defender; right to counsel) and Hyde & Drath v. Baker, 24 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 1994) (successful RICO defense, sanctions for discovery abuse).  During 1990-1993, Mr. Kaus represented an attorney defendant in the Lincoln Savings multi-district class action litigation in Tucson, Arizona.

Mr. Kaus served as an adjunct professor in federal practice at the University of San Francisco from 1992 through 1996. He was an instructor in trial practice at Boalt Hall School of Law at UC Berkeley from 1980 to 1984 and at Cardozo College of Law in New York in 1988. 

Mr. Kaus is an active lecturer in litigation and employment law-related continuing legal education programs presented by the California Continuing Education of the Bar (CEB) and The Rutter Group, most recently participating in a CEB program on the law of electronic discovery. Mr. Kaus has written and edited materials for CEB and The Rutter Group and contributes occasional columns on litigation and media issues to the Los Angeles Daily Journal and the San Francisco Daily Journal. He has served as court appointed mediator and discovery referee in state and federal court and as Judge Pro Tem of the Marin County Superior Court by stipulation of parties.

Mr. Kaus was a member of the Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF) Board of Directors from 1999 through 2000, and BASF Judiciary Committee from 1998 through 2000. He is chair of the BASF's Committee on Court Appointed Conflict Counsel that administers the program for court appointed attorneys for indigent criminal defendants in the San Francisco Superior Court where the Public Defender declines representation.  In 1995, Mr. Kaus received an Award of Merit from the BASF for his work on that committee and in 2002, Jeff Adachi, the elected Public Defender of San Francisco, honored Mr. Kaus for his work on the fortieth anniversary of Gideon v. Wainwright, the United States Supreme Court case that established an indigent criminal defendant's right to appointed counsel.

Mr. Kaus received his B.A. degree in political science, cum laude, from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1970.  He also studied politics for a year at the University of Sussex.  He received his J.D. degree from the University of California at Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law in 1973. Mr. Kaus was a partner of the litigation firm of Kaus, Kerr & Wagstaffe from 1982 through 1990.  Prior to that he was a deputy public defender in Contra Costa County. 

---

Representative Litigation

General Business Litigation: 

• Successful defense of Qui Tam action against company that leased medical devices.  United States ex rel Paranich v. Sorgnard, 396 F.3d 326 (3d Cir. 2005); 286 F.Supp.2d 445 (M.D. PA. 2003)  Receivership concluded in 2006.
  
• Foreclosure on Wickes Furniture for Taiwan creditors despite assertion of stay order from Taiwanese court.  In re Master Home Furniture Company Ltd., 261 B.R. 671 (Bank. Ct. C.D. CA. 2001)
  
• Dismissal of series of consumer class actions against cable provider, e.g. Whelan v. Century Communications, 1997 U.S. DIST LEXIS 16093 (N.D. CA. 1997)
  
• Dismissal of RICO case against convicted felon based on plaintiffs' discovery noncompliance.  Hyde & Drath v. Baker, 24 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 1994)
  
• Dismissal of business fraud allegations and award of attorneys' fees. (San Bernardino, 2006)
  
• Representation of developer in action alleging fraud and breach of contract. (Alameda County, 2003-2006) 

Constitutional Issues:

• Successful defense of appeal concerning control of temple against contention that trial court impermissibly decided religious issues.  Singh v. Singh, 114 Cal.App.4th 1264 (2004). 
  
• Union City's aggressive use of Megan's Law upheld in court trial. 

Design Professionals:

• Representation of engineers and architects in all proceedings, e.g. Edwards v. Centex et al, 53 Cal.App.4th 15 (1997) 

Appellate Litigation:

• Overturned criminal tax fraud conviction on grounds of jury misconduct.  United States v. Littlefield, 752 F.2d 1429 (9th Cir. 1985)                              
• Consumer class actions regarding bank service charges.  Perdue v. Crocker National Bank, 38 Cal.3d 913, (1985) app. dism. 475 U.S. 1001 (1986); Bank of America v. Cory, 164 Cal.App.3d 66 (1985).