John M. Kennedy is a Partner in the firm and has been in practice over 32 years.

John is a certified appellate specialist and his practice is centered in the employment, business/commercial disputes and personal injury areas of the law. He represents defendants and plaintiffs in state and federal court and continues to build a sophisticated appellate practice. His practice also focuses on complex commercial and class action litigation, as well as construction, toxic tort, and actions involving allegations of fraud and products liability.

He has defended clients in a wide range of matters including wage and hour class actions, employment disputes, intellectual property, business disputes, construction disputes, insurance coverage disputes and alleged violations of the federal securities laws. John has also represented owners of buildings, malls and restaurants in claims arising from alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Civil Rights Act.

John was formerly associated with O’Melveny & Myers and was Senior Counsel in the Los Angeles office of Liner, LLP as well as GARRELL LAW, P.C. In these positions, he focused on real estate, construction, entertainment, and complex employment litigation. He also represented various high-profile clients. Mr. Kennedy served on a litigation team for a major chemical company in its California toxic tort and asbestos litigation.

Prior to Liner, he served as a Senior Appellate Attorney for the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District from 2001 to 2009. In that capacity, he drafted over 275 bench memoranda for the Court thus leading him to become an appellate specialist. While at the Court, he authored bench memoranda in civil, criminal, probate and family law cases, involving a broad array of issues, from fraud, bad faith homeowner insurance coverage disputes from the Northridge Earthquake, first amendment rights, to criminal sentencing and custody disputes.

Before joining the Court, while a litigator with O’Melveny & Myers, he represented clients in state and federal court in toxic tort cases, such as the Exxon Valdez case. He also provided counsel on many complex cases, and served as an integral member of trial and arbitration teams.

Notable Engagements include representing: a prominent Southern California municipality in a high-profile personal injury matter; a chain of night clubs in its employment and business disputes; a major American chemical company in toxic tort and asbestos litigation; a major refuse hauler in a breach of contract action; a national restaurant chain in a trade-dress infringement action; a national radio company in a multi-million dollar lease dispute; and represented numerous business owners in commercial disputes. Mr. Kennedy has also served as in-house counsel to a film production company and supervised trademark and intellectual property litigation by outside counsel.

 Guest lecturer on a wide variety of appellate subjects in “The Complete Appeal: Strategies from Start to Finish,” An Intermediate to Advanced Appellate Course, May 8, 2008, Los Angeles, California.

 Taught an MCLE seminar entitled “Insight from a Former Research Attorney: Tips for Not Losing Your Appeal in the Trial Court,” Los Angeles, California. State Bar MCLE Approval from August 13, 2008 to August 13, 2010.

•   Katherine Scarlett Kappella, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 18301 – 1/2 E. 5th Ave. Corp. (dba Jumbo’s Clown Room), a California corporation; and Does 1 through 50, inclusive (2019) BC723618 (LASC – Central). Case resolved. Final judgment entered in favor of the class.
•   Jenetta L. Bracy, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. DG Hospitality Van Nuys, LLC; The Spearmint Rhino Companies Worldwide, Inc.; Spearmint Rhino Consulting Worldwide, Inc.; Dames N’ Games; John Does #1-10; and XYZ Corporations

#1-10 (2017) 5:17-cv-00854-VAP (DTBx) (C.D. Cal.). Settled. Received final approval.

•   Lauren Byrne, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Santa Barbara Hospitality Services, Inc., The Spearmint Rhino Companies Worldwide, Inc., Spearmint Rhino Consulting Worldwide, Inc., and Santa Barbara Hospitality Services, LLC (2017) 5:17-cv-00527-SVW (SPx) (C.D. Cal.). Settled. Received final approval. Final judgment has been entered.
•   Adriana Ortega, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Spearmint Rhino Companies Worldwide, Inc., Spearmint Rhino Consulting Worldwide, Inc., and Midnight Sun Enterprises, LLC (2017) 5:17-cv-00206-JGB (KKx) (C.D. Cal.). Settled. Received final approval. Final judgment has been entered.
•   Luis A. Cabrera, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Complete Facilities Maintenance, Inc. and Does 1 through 25, inclusive (2014) BC538248 (LASC – Central). Settled. Received final approval. Final judgment has been entered.
•   Veronica Mendez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Jewels Connection, Inc. and Does 1 through 50 (2010) BC443303 (LASC – Central). Settled. Received final approval. Final judgment has been entered.
•   Tracy Dawn Trauth, Christen Rivera, Jennifer Blair, Victoria Omlor, Jasmine Wright, Ancia Vintimilla, Marsha Ellington, Selena Denise Pelaez, Nicole Garcia, Reah Navarro, Tami Sanchez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Spearmint Rhino Companies Worldwide, Inc.; Spearmint Rhino Consulting Worldwide, Inc.; The Oxnard Hospitality Services, LP; City of Industry Hospitality Venture, Inc.; Downtown LA Club Venture, Inc.; Farmdale Hospitality Services, Inc.; High Expectations Hospitality, LLC; Inland Restaurant Venture 1, Inc.; K-Kel, Inc.; Kentucky Hospitality Venture, LLC, LCM, LLC; Midnight Sun Enterprises, Inc.; Olympic Avenue Venture, Inc.; Santa Barbara Hospitality Services, Inc.; Santa Maria Restaurant Enterprises, Inc.; WPB Hospitality LLC; Rialto Pockets, Inc.; and Rouge Gentlemen’s Club, Inc. (2009) EDVC09-1316-VAP (DTBx) (C.D. Cal.). After objections being filed, the case settled with final judgment having been entered and a class certified for settlement only.

•   Charles Johnson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Sun West Mortgage Company, Inc., a California company; Proctor Financial, Inc., a Michigan corporation; and Does 1 to 50, inclusive (2017) BC541571 (LASC – Central). Defendants defeated this case on Summary Judgment, which was unsuccessfully appealed.
•   Adriana Hernandez, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Fritz That’s It Gentlemen’s Club, a business entity form unknown; and Does 1 through 100, inclusive (2019) 30-2019-01091557-CU-OE-CXC (OCSC). Case resolved. Final judgment entered in favor of the class.
•   Adriana Hernandez, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 2523 E. Anaheim, Inc. dba XS Afterhours Gentlemens Club, a California corporation; and Does 1

through 100, inclusive (2019) 19STCV16831 (LASC – Central). Case resolved. Final judgment entered in favor of the class.

•   Adriana Hernandez, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. The Palms Gentlemens Club, a California corporation; and Does 1 through 100, inclusive (2019) 19STCV15211 (LASC – Central). Case resolved. Final judgment entered in favor of the class.
•   Ontario Food and Beverage, LLC v. Andre Schoorl, Director of the State of California Department of Industrial Relations and David M. Lanier, Secretary of the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency, D.C. No. 5:18-CV-00753-SJO-SP. This action challenged the Constitutionality of California Labor Code Section 350(e) as applied to “dancers.” The State’s Motion to Dismiss was granted and injunction denied. On November 25, 2019, the 9th Circuit affirmed the District Court.
•   Richard J. Soltis, Brittany Leigh Boltinghouse, Leigh Ann Soltis and Stephen Soltis v. City of Santa Monica and Aubrie Ahmadpour (2014) BC538405 (LASC – Central), With Mr. Kennedy we moved for summary judgment on behalf of the City of Santa Monica in a catastrophic injury case based on governmental immunity which motion was denied, but successfully overturned on a writ with judgment being entered in favor of the City of Santa Monica.
•   DV Diamond Club of Flint, LLC, et al. v. United States Small Business Administration, et al., (2020) 4:20-cv-10899. This case is currently pending in the Eastern District of Michigan. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief to restrain the Small Business Administration and others from discriminating against workers who are entitled to benefit from the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) provisions of the recently-enacted Coronavirus, Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, Pub L. No. 116-136 Sections 1101-03, 1107, 1114 (2020) (the “CARES Act”). The regulations and operating procedures of the Small Business Administration conflict with the text of the PPP and violate businesses and workers’ fundamental rights under the First and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution, among others. Preliminary Injunction granted. Defendants have appealed however the case is currently stayed pending forgiveness phase of PPP and any government denials of forgiveness.