Shelly Gopaul focuses her practice on franchise and business litigation.  She regularly represents franchisors on issues including trademark and trade secret infringement, contract disputes, unlawful detainer and ADA claims.  She has also represented franchisors and other businesses on several class action lawsuits, successfully opposing motions for class certification.  Ms. Gopaul has successfully defended against claims brought under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030) and claims brought under the Stored Communications Act (18 U.S.C. § 2701).  She has also represented financial institutions in both federal and state courts on issues and claims concerning federal regulation of the industry, including RESPA, TILA and HOEPA, as well as state consumer protection statutes and common law predatory lending claims.  Ms. Gopaul has prepared and argued successful appellate briefs before the California Supreme Court, California Courts of Appeal and the Second and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeal.  She has prevailed on numerous motions for summary judgments, motions to dismiss and demurrers on behalf of her clients.  She drafts and argues motions, conducts depositions and mediations and participates in trials. Ms. Gopaul has been named as a Rising Star by Southern California Super Lawyers from 2010 through 2012. 

Select Representations

• Kaneshiro v. Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P., 2012 WL 1957432 (Cal.App. 4 Dist.) (affirming judgment in favor of lender, noting that the deed of trust did not prevent a lender from paying the delinquent property taxes then recouping the amounts paid from the owner of the property by increasing the monthly payments owed to the lender)
• Laney v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc., (S.D. Tex. 2011) (summary judgment granted in favor of Defendant on plaintiff's claims for race and gender discrimination, Family Medical Leave Act retaliation, wrongful termination and breach of contract dismissed)
• Duke v. Avis Rent a Car System, Inc. et al., 2010 WL 4706093 (Cal. App. 2 Dist.) (California Court of Appeal affirms trial court's ruling denying class certification to a group of agency operators who claimed that, contrary to their contractual agreements with Avis and Budget, they were employees and not independent contractors under California law).
• Shakey's USA, Inc. v. Tutto's Pizza Corp. et al., 2009 WL 3211027 (E.D.Cal. 2009) and 2010 WL 14815 (E.D.Cal. 2010) (Permanent injunction and Lanham Act damages awarded to franchisor Shakey's where franchisee continued operating restaurant after the franchise agreement was terminated using Shakey's trademarks and trade secrets).
• Stites v. Promus Hotel Corporation et al., 2009 WL 189413 (Cal. App. 2 Dist.) (affirmed trial court’s dismissal of action in favor of franchisor and affirmed cost award of $422,487.00 in favor of the defendants; petition for review denied by California Supreme Court)
• Dark v. Hilton Hotels Corp. et al., 2009 WL 4548351 (Ct. App. 2 Dist.), Bus. Franchise Guide (CCH) ¶ 14,296 (franchisor not vicariously liable for franchisee’s alleged negligence and violation of California’s Unruh Act because there was no evidence that the franchisee and its employees were actual or ostensible agents of the franchisor)
• Exposito v. Hilton Hotels Corp. et al., Bus Franchise Guide (CCH) ¶ 14,071 (LASC 2008) (granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants and finding that a franchisor, its Chairman and its General Counsel were not liable for claims under California’s Unruh Act, Disabled Persons Act and Business and Professions Code § 17200 based on the alleged wrongdoing of franchisee)
• Century Pacific, Inc. v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 354 Fed.Appx. 49 (2d. Cir. 2009) (Second Circuit affirms trial court's ruling granting summary judgment in favor of Hilton on franchisee's fraud claims arising from the sale of the Red Lion hotel chain)

Bar and Court Admissions

California, 2006

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Education

University of Southern California, J.D., 2006

Johns Hopkins University, B.A., 2003

Publications

• "Can A Franchisor Be Sued for 'Malpractice'?" Franchise Law News (Q3 2011), by Glenn Plattner and Shelly Gopaul