Bar & Court Admissions
- State Bar of California
- District of Columbia Bar
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California and District of Columbia
- United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Association of Trial Lawyers
Century City Bar Association
Los Angeles County Bar Association
Sports Lawyers Association
Del Rey American Little League
Georgetown University Law Center, J.D.
University of Maryland, B.S.
Peter L. Steinman
Peter Steinman is a partner in M&R’s Los Angeles office. Going on thirty years, he has forged a reputation as a premier complex commercial litigator, with a practice that focuses on commercial, business, real estate, insurance coverage, entertainment and sports-related matters venued in both state and federal courts. Peter has represented individual and corporate clients in a wide array of cases involving contracts, legal malpractice and business torts, including fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. Likewise, he has defended and prosecuted lawsuits arising out of real estate purchase agreements and construction contracts; counseled numerous businesses through employment matters, including many concerning breach of contract, discrimination, harassment and retaliation based on California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act; and has successfully defended Fortune 500 clients in multi-million dollar wrongful termination claims.
Peter also has significant expertise in entertainment law, having represented major motion picture studios in fraud actions between artists, on the one hand, and their managers, record labels and production companies, on the other. He has, in addition, successfully resolved several commercial disputes for sports franchise owners and athletes, including matters involving agents and others pertaining to territorial rights.
A member of the firm's Advertising & Digital Media Industry Group, Peter handles significant litigation in that space. His broad-based experience extends, as well, to family law cases, including the defense of palimony actions and representation of corporations affiliated with one or both spouses.
Business Litigation: Successfully defended a leading credit card processor in two “bet-the-company” class actions involving usury and violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) claims. Obtained dismissal of the usury class action claims at the pleading stage by demonstrating that a class action waiver was enforceable and not procedurally and substantively unconscionable as the plaintiffs had argued. The trial court issued an order striking the class action allegations, which transformed a multi-million dollar action into an $18,000 claim. The ruling was affirmed on appeal. The individual plaintiff was forced to settle for a waiver of appellate costs. Then favorably settled one CIPA claim by demonstrating that individual issues would predominate over common issues, rendering class action status improper.
Business Litigation: Obtained a $400,000 settlement of a complex fraud and family law matter against a Hong Kong resident. The case emanated from a contentious divorce proceeding in which the opposing spouse fraudulently underreported the estate’s assets. After the client was forced into bankruptcy, a bankruptcy court approval was obtained to prosecute a fraud action, forcing the defalcating spouse to settle on favorable terms.
Complex Civil Litigation: Represented the owner of a multimillion-dollar ocean view home in California. The client was embroiled in a complex dispute with her stepfather, who encumbered the house by way of a poorly negotiated settlement agreement in related family and palimony actions pending in San Diego. Rescued the client/homeowner from the terms of that agreement, which included the workout of an unfavorable loan on the property that was in default. Likewise, after the stepfather breached the terms of the settlement agreement and otherwise stalled the sale of the residence for well over a year, successfully convince the San Diego Superior Court to intervene and enter judgment under Code of Civil Procedure §664.6. In so doing, the Court also issued cease and desist and sanctions orders to prevent the stepfather from further interference with the client’s efforts to sell the property. Ultimately, efforts led to the stepfather’s purchase of the client’s interest in the home, and resolution of a case that was – prior to the firm’s engagement – seemingly hopeless.
Construction Litigation: Obtained a $600,000+ settlement in a complex construction defect matter, representing a prominent professional football player against a builder/developer and over 20 subcontractors.
Construction Litigation: Obtained a $1 million+ settlement for a developer and general contractor in litigation against the design professionals of a large mixed use project in Burbank, California.
Employment Litigation: A former employee of Mr. Steinman’s client, a wealthy elderly housebound woman, claimed the defendant had repeatedly cursed at him and made gay and ethnic slurs. After initiating discovery and conducting a background investigation, the plaintiff agreed to dismiss all claims.
Entertainment Litigation: Successfully defended a major motion picture studio in a $20 million profit participation and fraud action. He not only successfully defended the studio against the plaintiff television series co-creator's claim, but also obtained a $1.5 million award of attorneys' fees and costs.
Injunctive Relief: Obtained injunctive relief on behalf of the owners of an assisted living facility as against a management company that breached its agreement to pay the owners a monthly management fee, reimburse the owners’ lease payments on the facility (approximately $86K each month) and preserve the owners’ license issued by the Department of Social Services to operate the facility. By virtue of M&R’s efforts, the owners were able to regain control and possession of the facility placed in jeopardy due to the management company’s negligence.
Insurance Coverage Defense: Obtained summary judgment on behalf of an insurance carrier client – and defended a cross-motion for summary judgment filed against it – in a complex insurance coverage case stemming from the carrier’s denial of coverage based upon specific matter and related exclusions and policy provisions. The insured was a luxury high-rise co-op facing five underlying lawsuits, four filed by lending banks and one, a derivative action, prosecuted on behalf of an apartment owner. The coverage matter was hotly contested and involved multiple depositions on both coasts and repeated discovery motions (M&R’s client prevailed on each one). In fact, so complicated was the case, that the winning motion for summary judgment was supported by a 68-page separate statement of undisputed facts. In the end, the firm’s carrier client avoided exposure in the eight-figure range.
NHL Arbitration: Successfully represented a prominent National Hockey League player in the first arbitration under the former NHL collective bargaining agreement. The player was sued by his former agent for breach of contract and fraud based on a standardized contract he did not understand. After vacating a default judgment, Mr. Steinman successfully moved for binding arbitration and obtained a favorable resolution for the player.
- Law360, December 10, 2015
- Law360, July 21, 2015
- The Recorder, January 12, 2015
- Daily Journal, January 12, 2015
- LA Business Journal, January 7, 2015
- DRMA Voice, November 8, 2016
- The Recorder, December 23, 2015
- Casino Enterprise Management, September 2015
- A “Reason to Believe” the FTC Is Quite Unhappy December 3, 2018
- The Key to Native Advertisement in Three Words: Disclose, Disclose, Disclose February 20, 2018
- Direct Response Marketers Beware April 11, 2017
- Marketers of Health Supplement Settle FTC Charges Over Deceptive Advertising October 14, 2016
- CA Appellate Court Rules That Outside Counsel’s Fact Investigation is Privileged July 21, 2016
- Smarter, Stronger, Faster: FTC Cracking Down on Deceptive Health-Related Advertising June 14, 2016
- Legal Storm Enveloping Trump “University” Highlights Potential Advertising Pitfalls March 15, 2016
- Another DraftKings Class Action: A Primer on California False Advertising Claims November 19, 2015
- Could We See a Major Shake Up in Advertising for DraftKings and FanDuel? November 19, 2015
- Predetermined Outcome or Not, Sweepstakes and Slot Machines are Illegal under California Law July 8, 2015
- Advertisers and their Agencies Must Disclose Material Connection between Endorsers and Products/Services April 17, 2015