Issa Mikel is Senior Counsel in Tyson & Mendes’ Los Angeles office who primarily practices general liability, intellectual property, and commercial litigation. Mr. Mikel has extensive litigation experience, including representing businesses and individuals in state and federal courts in California and New York.
Mr. Mikel has successfully resolved a variety of cases involving complex business, securities, class action, corporate control, and fraud disputes, among others. He successfully defended several matters involving trademark infringement and provides assistance to clients facing opposition to trademark applications before the TTAB. He recently won an arbitration verdict in favor of a real estate developer arising out of a breach of contract action against its partner. He also won dismissal with prejudice of a breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty complaint demanding several million dollars in connection with the purchase of a note on distressed real estate. Mr. Mikel also represented a top private equity firm in a $2 billion Securities Exchange Act and breach of fiduciary duty action, in which he won dismissal in Federal District Court and affirmance in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
Mr. Mikel earned his J.D. in 2005 from Columbia University School of Law, his M.A. with merit in 1999 from the School of Oriental and African Studies, in London, and his B.A. summa cum laude in 1998 from Brandeis University. Mr. Mikel is licensed to practice law in California and New York.
In his free time, Mr. Mikel enjoys spending time with his wife and daughter, reading, watching films, and traveling.
Recent PostsColorado Court of Appeals Rules Jury Instruction on Aggravation or Alternative Causation of Plaintiff’s Injuries Improper Absent Affirmative Evidence Presented by Defendant
Can a Colorado trial court in a personal injury trial instruct the jury to consider the effects on plaintiff’s injuries of alternative incidents (such as a second car accident) if the defendant fails to introduce evidence supporting such an instruction? In Herrera v. Lerma, 2018 COA 141 (September 20, 2018), the Colorado Court of Appeal answered the question in the negative and held such instruction would invite the jury to engage in “mere conjecture.”Colorado Supreme Court Rules Strict Privity Required for Non-Clients to Sue Attorneys, Absent Fraud, Malicious Conduct, or Negligent Misrepresentation
Can a non-client sue an attorney for malpractice or breach of contract absent a showing of fraud, malicious conduct, or negligent misrepresentation? In Bewley v. Semler, 2018 CO 79 (Sept. 24, 2018), the Colorado Supreme Court answered the question in the negative. Absent such claims of wrongdoing, the strict privity rule bars claims against attorneys by non-clients, because, as the court ruled, holding otherwise may force attorneys to place non-clients’ interests ahead of clients’ interests.In California, Potential Employers Can Be Liable Under Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) for Misleading Pregnant Applicants Who Never Submit an Application
Can a potential employer be held liable under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Government Code section 12900, et seq., for thwarting a pregnant woman from applying for a job by falsely telling her no position is available? In the recent opinion in Abed, the California Court of Appeal, First District, held that it can. Abed v. Western Dental Services, Inc. (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 726.Colorado Parties Must Be Wary Not to Rely on Privileged Claims or Communications When Submitting Attorney Affidavits
Does a party impliedly waive attorney-client privilege by submitting an affidavit from counsel to rebut factual allegations of discovery misconduct? According to the Colorado Supreme Court, in State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Griggs (2018 CO 50), if the affidavit recites merely facts and does not discuss legal advice provided to the client or assert claims or defenses that rely on privileged communications, the privilege is not waived.