Matthew A. Reynolds

Matthew A. Reynolds

Partner
Location:
Irvine, California
Phone:
949-345-1621
Fax:
949-261-8800
Email:

Since joining Kring & Chung, LLP in 2006, Mr. Reynolds has taken on a full range of cases representing both plaintiffs and defendants.  Mr. Reynolds combines 15 years of sophisticated business litigation to complex executive divorces.  As a business litigator, he has recovered over $30,000,000.00 for his clients.  When defending his business clients, he has garnered defense verdicts and excellent settlements.  His business background includes work in both federal and state court in the areas of breach of contract, fraud, copyright, trademark and energy. 

Mr. Reynolds success in business litigation led him to work on executive divorce cases in Orange County.  He focuses on business valuation, hidden assets, and protecting the interests of children.  His business litigation experience gives him a unique perspective on providing business decisions during divorce.  This advice allows for better business decisions that are also consistent with the family law fiduciary duties.  Mr. Reynolds has also had success in tracking hidden assets insuring there is a fair evaluation of the martial estate.  Mr. Reynolds can assist a spouse in filing separate business litigation during the divorce to maximize the client’s recovery.

With numerous years of trials and arbitrations, Mr. Reynolds has the experience to organize an economic and direct litigation strategy. 

Recent Accomplishments
While Mr. Reynolds does not disclose results from family law disputes, the following is a representative list of his recent business law accomplishments:

$16,500,000 Net Benefit Settlement - 2013 Idaho Energy Savings Performance Contract
Mr. Kring and Mr. Reynolds, with their local Idaho Counsel, engaged in an 18 month legal battle on behalf of their School District client against a pacific northwest Energy Services Company ("ESCO") on an Energy Savings Performance Contract ("ESPC").  The ESCO initially sued the District on the allegation that the District owed it approximately $7,000,000 in change orders.  The District counter sued alleging, among other items: fraud, that the contract was an ESPC, and negligence for construction deficiencies.  The ESCO claimed in legal documents that the contract was a design build contract. 
A settlement was reached which gave a net result to the District in excess of $16,500,000.  The general terms of the settlement were: 

  • The ESCO agreed to dismiss it's claim of approximately $7,000,000.  
  • The ESCO agreed to guarantee $9,500,000 in energy savings. 
  • The ESCO paid the District $800,000 for legal fees incurred in the matter. 
  • The ESCO agreed to complete the work at issue. 
  • The District paid $665,000 for work performed by the ESCO. 

Here is the joint press release issued by the ESCO and the District.

$2,440,000 Settlement - 2011 Oklahoma Energy Litigation
Mr. Reynolds acted as the handling attorney in coordination with co-counsel in Oklahoma to obtain a settlement, in large part from a Fortune 100 company, in the amount of $2,440,000.  The case involved allegations of fraud, energy failures, and construction defects on an energy savings performance contract. 

$2,119,000 Settlement -  2009 - California Energy Contracting Litigation
Mr. Reynolds was the handling attorney on a case where Kring & Chung's school district client entered into a Performance (Energy) Contract in the amount of $2,000,000 that guaranteed that energy savings would pay for the cost of construction over a ten year period.  Construction included work on ceilings, HVAC units, and lighting.  Through discovery and investigation, our firm uncovered issues relating to construction, potential fraud, and underperformance of the energy guarantee.  The result was a settlement on behalf of our client in the amount of $1,735,000 plus a debt forgiveness of $384,000 resulting in a net benefit of $2,119,000. 

Defense Dismissal Obtained - 2011 - Illinois Federal Court - Intellectual Property
Mr. Reynolds prepared a motion in Illinois Federal Court that resulted in a dismissal of a claim against the firm's client based on allegations of copyright infringement.  Kring & Chung was able to show that a purported assignment of the copyright was not valid or enforceable. 

Defense Verdict - 2011 - California Construction Accident
Roland J. Amundsen and Matthew A. Reynolds represented a crane company in a case where a 73,000 pound I-Beam girder the crane was carrying broke in mid-air causing numerous injuries to Plaintiff.  Plaintiff claimed back, shoulder, head, and hand injuries as well as loss of employment for over five years.  Despite these injuries, and the fact that Kring & Chung’s client was carrying the beam at the time of the accident, Kring & Chung’s client received a defense verdict with a finding of no liability.  The jury awarded Plaintiff $1,600,000.00 as against the other defendants in the matter.  The case involved a number of highly technical issues that could have easily confused a jury.  Kring & Chung simplified the case and was able to prevail.

$1,980,000 Trial Verdict - 2014 - California Elder Abuse
Roland J. Amundsen and Matthew A. Reynolds engaged in a three week trial in San Bernardino Superior Court.  After a hotly disputed trial, Kring & Chung's client was awarded a verdict of $1,980,000 consisting of actual damages, statutory damages, and attorneys fees.

$1,350,000 Settlement - 2009 - California School District Litigation
Mr. Reynolds was the handling attorney on a case involving a school district that entered into an energy contract wherein a construction company guaranteed that energy savings would pay for the cost of the contract over a ten year period.  The District brought allegations of fraud, breach of contract, and construction defects.  The case was venued in Bakersfield.  The result was a settlement on behalf of the school district in the amount of $1,350,000.

$1,300,000 Settlement - 2009 - School District Litigation
Mr. Reynolds worked with a team of attorneys on a case involving a Performance Contract entered into by a school district.  The district alleged that the work done pursuant to this contract was defective, that it was fraudulently induced to enter into the contract, and the savings guaranteed failed to materialize.  The case was venued in Bakersfield.  The result was a settlement on behalf of the school district in the amount of $1,300,000. 

Reversal of Award - Trial - 2009 Business Litigation - Defense
Mr. Reynolds was part of a trial team that reduced a jury verdict from over $3,000,000 to $328,752.  The case was venued in San Francisco.  In 2008, a San Francisco jury found a business liable for damages in excess of $3,000,000.  After a motion for new trial was granted, in 2009, Mr. Reynolds became part of a trial team task with reducing this award.  The trial team was able to reduce the award by nearly 90%.

Business Litigation - 2009 - Defense
In this action, our client was accused of fraud in production faulty construction material that allegedly resulted in construction defects in hundreds of homes.  Plaintiff, an installer of the product, made allegations of several million dollars including recovery of all costs associated with fixing the individual homes.  Mr. Reynolds prepared a motion to the Court proving that the damages were speculative.  The Court granted the motion and dismissed the claim of damages as to the individual homeowners.  The motion removed in excess of $1,700,000 in damages.

$1,500,000 Settlement - 2009 - School District Litigation
Mr. Reynolds worked with a team of attorneys on a case involving a school district that entered into an energy contract wherein a construction company guaranteed that energy savings would pay for the cost of the contract over a ten year period.  The district brought allegations of fraud, breach of contract, and construction defects.  The case was venued in Bakersfield.  The result was a settlement on behalf of the school district in the amount of $1,500,000.

$850,000 Settlement - 2009 - School District Litigation
Mr. Reynolds worked with a team of attorneys on a case involving a school district that entered into an energy contract wherein a construction company guaranteed that energy savings would pay for the cost of the contract over a ten year period.  The District brought allegations of fraud, breach of contract, and construction defects.  The case was venued in Bakersfield.  The result was a settlement on behalf of the school district in the amount of $850,000.

 

Year Joined Firm

  • 2006

Areas of Practice

  • Business Litigation
  • Construction
  • Family Law
  • Insurance
  • Intellectual Property
  • Personal Injury
  • Public School Construction

Bar Admissions

  • California, 2001
  • U.S. District Court Central District of California, 2003

Education

  • Pepperdine University School of Law, Malibu, California
    • Juris Doctor cum laude - 2003
  • Youngstown State University
    • B.A., Bachelor of Arts summa cum laude - 1998
    • Honors: Clarence Gould Society for Academic Excellence, Liberal Arts & Science
    • Major: History
    • Major: Philosophy

Honors and Awards

  • Witkin Excellence Awards in Constitutional Law
  • Witkin Excellence Awards in Products Liability
  • Witkin Excellence Awards in Labor Law
  • CALI Excellence Awards in Products Liability
  • CALI Excellence Awards in Individual Rights
  • American Jurisprudence Award in Criminal Law

Past Employment Positions

  • Morrow & White, 2001 - 2006