Eric Benink

Mr. Benink was admitted to the California Bar in 1997. He received a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from the University of Massachusetts - Amherst in 1992 and a joint Juris Doctor and Master of Business Administration degree from the University of San Diego in 1996.

In 1997, Mr. Benink began working in the Enforcement Division of the Department of Corporations (now the Department of Business Oversight), California’s securities, commodities, franchise, and finance and mortgage lender regulator. He investigated dozens of illegal stock offerings, private placement frauds, illicit brokerage practices, and Ponzi schemes; and brought civil and administrative actions against the perpetrators. He also worked closely with criminal agencies in their prosecution of violators of laws under the jurisdiction of the Department.

In 2002, Mr. Benink joined Krause & Kalfayan as an associate and in 2005, became a partner in the firm, which was renamed Krause Kalfayan Benink & Slavens, LLP (KKBS) and then renamed to Benink & Slavens, LLP in 2019. He represents consumers, businesses and shareholders in securities, consumer fraud, business litigation, in actions in state and federal court. He has prosecuted consumer and business litigation cases against Wells Fargo Bank, Sprint, Ticketmaster, Fleet Bank, and Apple Computer. He has represented hedge funds in securities actions.

Mr. Benink is the author of The Model State Commodities Code, A Regulator's Perspective, published in the Law Enforcement Reporter, Winter 1999. He has testified as a securities expert witness for the San Diego District Attorney’s Office and has been appointed by the California Superior Court as a receiver in five securities/investment fraud cases (three civil and two criminal). As a receiver he has seized and liquidated assets, including bank accounts, securities accounts, vehicles, and real estate; initiated adversary proceedings against third parties on behalf of the receivership estate; developed and implemented victim distribution plans; and prepared reports to the appointing courts. In December 2018, the San Mateo Superior Court (Judge Ayoob) appointed him a receiver, pursuant to Penal Code section 186.1,1 in People v. Gamos, et. al., Case No. 18SF014404AB.

Mr. Benink is a member of the San Diego County Bar Association, the Consumer Attorneys of San Diego, a graduate of LEAD San Diego, and former President of the Old Mission Rotary Club (2009 - 2010) and current member.  He is a former member and Vice-Chair of the Board of Directors for the George G. Glenner Alzheimer’s Centers, Inc.  He has been a contributor to the Trial Bar News, a publication of the Consumer Attorneys of San Diego.  He is a member of the Art Pratt Foundation which funds charitable causes throughout San Diego county.  He was designated a Super Lawyer by Super Lawyers magazine in each year, 2014 - 2019.

Mr. Benink acted as lead counsel in Shames v. City of San Diego, (San Diego Superior Court, Case No. GIC 831539), a class action that recovered $40 million for residential sewer customers for violations of Proposition 218. He has also prosecuted numerous class actions cases, including but not limited to: Soto v. STI Prepaid, LLC (San Diego Superior Court, Case No. GIC868083) (violation of prepaid calling card statute); Neborsky v. Redem Technologies, Inc. (San Diego Superior Court, Case No. GIC GIC804280) (securities fraud);  Milne v. Ticket Innovations, Inc. (breach of fiduciary duty to shareholders) (Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 311258);  Ruffalo v. En Pointe Technologies, Inc. (United States District Court, Southern District of California, Case No. 3:01-cv-00205 BEN-AJB) (federal securities fraud); Rivera v. Sprint International Communications Corp., (San Diego Superior Court, Case No. GIC799868) (international phone over charges); and Horn v. Commercial Lending Capital, Inc., (Riverside Superior Court, Case No. RIC10019819) (illegal lender advance fees).

His focus today is in the representing ratepayers and taxpayers in cases alleging illegal utility fees and taxes imposed by local government in violation of Proposition 218 and Proposition 26 and has presented Proposition 218 to civic organizations.