Kensington v Iwuchuku, Los Angeles County Superior Court Case Number BC507797.



Metu Ogike is listed by the court of appeals as one of the defendants in this lawsuit.






From the court of appeal ruling it is Lawzilla's understanding the following happened:

Two former employees filed a lawsuit claiming wrongful termination and other employment related claims. They took a default against the defendants and were awarded $250,585.




Based on Los Angeles County online court records Metu Ogike is listed as an attorney for the employees filing their complaint.




After the $250k default judgment was obtained $293k was levied and taken from accounts belonging to the defaulted parties.




Objections were made and it was claimed the default judgment was obtained due to a false proof of service.




The trial court judge entirely granted the objections and motion and vacated the default and judgment.




Despite the default judgment being reversed it appears attorney Ogike did not voluntarily return the wrongfully obtained money.

A motion was filed about the issue which the judge granted. Metu Ogike was ordered to return the money within 20 days.




It appears Metu Ogike, Esq., did not comply with the court order.

The judge then allowed a lawsuit to be filed against Ogike and the other attorneys due to their failure to return the money.




Attorney Metu Ogike then filed a motion claiming the lawsuit was "barred" because their conduct was "privileged". In other words, the lawyers were "privileged" to keep roughly $250,000 in wrongfully obtained money - that a judge had already ordered them to return.




The trial judge denied Ogike's motion. The court ruled that their "wrongful disbursement or retention of assets seized pursuant to a void judgment does not constitute protected activity."




Ogike then filed an appeal.

First, the attorney claimed the trial court had no jurisdiction to allow the lawsuit seeking the return of the wrongfully obtained money because it did not have jurisdiction to do so.

The court of appeal ruled there was "no merit" to this claim.




The justices of the court of appeal the noted there was a court order for Metu Ogike and others to return the money - but they "had failed to comply with the court's order."




The court of appeal then upheld the trial court in rejecting Ogike's argument.

The justices noted the attorney was being sued for not returning money (1) after the default judgment was vacated and (2) after a court order directing the return of the money.

The court said this is not "protected activity".




Lawzilla Commentary and Review: In our opinion this is one of the most amazing cases we have seen involving attorneys.

How can an attorney not return money improperly levied? Money a judge has ordered be returned?

Basically, it's theft.

To us it is incredible the money was not returned. The justices said there was "no merit" to claims - which indicates to us the attorneys also do not know the law - which further reflects on their professional judgment.

Bottom line: truly amazing an attorney would refuse to return money after the default judgment was taken - and refuse to obey a court order to do so.

Based on what we have read from the appellate justices we think Metu Ogike is heading to prison and disbarment. We would not recommend hiring Ogike as an attorney, but we have reached out for comment to see if there is more to this fascinating story.

was admitted to the California Bar in 2005. Bar Number 236362.

Law Office of Metu C Ogike
4804 Laurel Canyon Boulevard # 175
Valley Village, California 91607

Law School: Southwestern University School Of Law