Representative Client Matters

We take pride in the firm’s record of wins in Washington State Courts, Federal District Courts, the U.S. Tax Court, the Washington Courts of Appeal, and the U.S. Board of  Tax Appeals. Successful procedural and other victories have also enabled favorable settlements before the State of Washington Department of Revenue and Tax Board, the California Franchise Tax Board and the taxing authorities in New York.

Protected the Rights of Minority Members in the Judicial Dissolution of an LLC

MDK Law successfully defended the interests of minority members in limited liability company (LLC) in a judicial dissolution action. In the case, the majority member argued that he was entitled to 51% of company’s assets at dissolution. MDK Law successfully established at trial that pursuant to applicable statutory law the majority member was not entitled to any of the LLC’s assets because the majority member’s capital account was negative and because the value of the minority members’ capital accounts exceeded the value of the company’s assets.

The result was that the net assets of the LLC were distributed solely to the minority members as a return of capital, a non-taxable event. MDK Law subsequently successfully opposed the majority member’s appeal that sought to have the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law reversed as well as the trial court’s order that severely limited the type and amount of evidence the majority shareholder could present at trial.

Prosecuted Claims for Negligence Against an Accounting Firm Related the Preparation and Filing of State Tax Returns

MDK Law represented a small business owner against his former accountant in a negligence action concerning state taxes. MDK Law obtained the reversal of a trial court’s dismissal of the client’s against the accountant.

The Washington State Court of Appeals agreed with MDK Law’s argument that the clients’ claims accrued when the taxing authority, in this case the Washington Department of Revenue, had no other authority but to enforce the judgment. As a result, the claims against the accountant were within the three year statute of limitations for negligence and breach of an oral contract. The opinion is published at Murphey v. Grass, 164 Wn. App. 584, 267 P.3d 376 (2011). The decision of the Court of Appeals was upheld by the State of Washington Supreme Court when it denied review. Upon remand MDK Law negotiated favorable settlement terms on behalf of their clients.

Defended an International Technology Company from Unpaid Commissions Claims

MDK Law successfully defended a global technology company with more than 20,000 international employees against claims that it had failed to pay wages and therefore was liable to its former employees for damages that approximated $800,000.00. Instead of a nearly million dollar judgment against MDK Law’s client, the court agreed with the firm’s presentation and awarded the former employees approximately 15% of what they initially sought.

Persuaded Washington’s Department of Review to dismiss a Tax Assessment Against a Regional Moving Company While the Matter was on Appeal Before the Board of Tax Appeals

MDK Law obtained a stipulated dismissal of state tax assessment against a regional moving company for sales taxes on packaging material. MDK obtained the stipulated dismissal after the firm submitted its appellate brief before the Board of Tax Appeals. After dismissal of the assessment, the DOR did not initiate a new audit. The attorneys that worked on this matter were Mark D. Kimball and James P. Ware.

Defended a National Equipment Leasing Company from a Washington Tax Assessment for Alleged Unpaid B&O Taxes

MDK Law successfully decreased a state tax assessment for unpaid B&O taxes by 90% before the Appeals Division of the DOR. MDK argued, and the administrative law judgment agreed, that the vast majority of work performed by MDK’s client, an equipment leasing and financing company, was performed by individuals outside Washington state and therefore not subject to Washington’s B&O taxes. As a result, the Department reduced the assessed by approximately 90%.

Negotiated a Favorable Settlement on Behalf of a Large Night Club for the Purported Failure to Collect the “Opportunity to Dance”

MDK Law obtained a negotiated settlement that reduced the tax liability for unpaid sales tax for purported “opportunity to dance” for a large nightclub by approximately 75%. MDK Law obtained the result by challenging the validity of the applicable administrative code at the court level while administratively challenging the assessed amount. The specific administrative code was later repealed.

 Obtained and Successfully Collected a Six Figure Judgment for an International Fishing Rod Manufacturer Against a Customer in Texas

MDK Law obtained a six figure judgment upon summary judgment for an international fishing rod manufacturer for a retailer’s unpaid invoices. MDK Law also successfully defended the judgment through the retailer’s appeal to the Washington Court of Appeals, Division I and the retailer’s petition to the Washington Supreme Court. MDK Law then coordinated with counsel in Texas, the place of business for the retailer/judgment debtor, to collect on the judgment.

Secured a Reversal by the Washington Court of Appeals of a $300,000.00 Judgment Against a “Hard Money” Lender for the Purported Failure to Fund a Loan

MDK Law secured a reversal of trial court’s grant of summary judgment by the Washington Court of Appeals, Division II  of a claim for breach of contract for failure to fund a hard money loan. The remand reversed a quarter million dollar judgment against MDK Law’s client.  The attorneys that worked on this matter were Mark D. Kimball and James P. Ware.

Defeated an “Anti-Slapp” Motion Against Internet Marketing Company After it Claimed Defamatory Statements were Published Online

MDK Law successfully opposed a motion to dismiss defamation claims related to the publishing and distribution of defamatory online material. The motion was brought pursuant to Washington’s Anti-SLAPP statute. MDK Law was able to establish that through a prior evidentiary hearing for a TRO that the trial court had already ruled that the client’s assertion of defamation was meritorious. As a result, the claim that the suit was a SLAPP suit meant to stifle the Defendants’ exercise of free speech was rejected by the trial court.