Beginning Next Week: InsideCounsel will become part of Corporate Counsel. Bringing these two industry-leading websites together will now give you comprehensive coverage of the full spectrum of issues affecting today's General Counsel at companies of all sizes. You will continue to receive expert analysis on key issues including corporate litigation, labor developments, tech initiatives and intellectual property, as well as Women, Influence & Power in Law (WIPL) professional development content. Plus we'll be serving all ALM legal publications from one interconnected platform, powered by, giving you easy access to additional relevant content from other InsideCounsel sister publications.

To prevent a disruption in service, you will be automatically redirected to the new site next week. Thank you for being a valued InsideCounsel reader!


More On

Orrick earns pro bono default judgment for nearly $1 million

Orrick earns pro bono default judgment for nearly $1 million

Elizabeth Howard

Working pro bono, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP notched a victory recently when Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Peter H. Kirwan entered a default judgment for just under $1 million against four participants in an alleged loan modification fraud scheme. The judge also allowed the case to proceed as a class action.

“We are delighted with the prospect that we may soon be able to bring some relief to our clients,” said Orrick partner Elizabeth Howard in a statement. “We are looking forward to our day in court to prove our case of fraud against the rest of the defendants.”

According to the firm, the complaint in the case alleges that the class of approximately 250 California homeowners had entered into contracts for loan modification services with the defendants, paid upfront fees of between approximately $3,000 and $5,000 per property for these services and then were not provided with the promised loan modification services. The complaint alleges that the defendants promised refunds to anyone who didn’t get a loan modification, but then refused to give those refunds to homeowners whose loan modifications didn’t come through. The complaint alleges that many class members negotiated primarily with the defendants in Spanish but did not receive a translation of the written agreements as required by California law. As a result of this alleged loan modification fraud, the victims lost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The Law Foundation of Silicon Valley and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law are also working with Orrick to represent the plaintiffs.

Howard, who has a J.D. from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law and a Ph.D. in molecular biology from the University of California, Berkeley, co-chairs Orrick’s life sciences practice. She focuses on patent infringement litigation, with an emphasis on the life sciences. Her practice also includes trade secrets disputes and handling anti-counterfeiting matters in the pharmaceutical industry. 

Contributing Author

author image

Amy I. Stickel

Amy I. Stickel has extensive experience covering the legal, financial and pharmaceutical industries as a writer and editor. A past managing editor of Corporate Legal Times and...

Bio and more articles

Join the Conversation

Advertisement. Closing in 15 seconds.