Representative Briefs

Amicus Support and Shaping the Law

  • Howell v. Hamilton Meats & Provisions, Inc. (2010)
    California Supreme Court amici curiae brief arguing that the common-law collateral source rule does not allow a plaintiff to recover as medical expense damages the “usual and customary” charges billed by the plaintiff’s healthcare providers when the providers agreed to accept as full payment for their services lesser amounts from the plaintiff’s health insurance carrier.
  • Chavez v. City of Los Angeles (2009)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of public interest organizations in dispute over availability of attorney fees in low-damage discrimination cases.
  • Caso Campo Algodonero (2009)
    Amici curiae brief in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on behalf of various women’s and human rights organizations, supporting claims against Mexico under the American Convention on Human Rights and the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence Against Women.
  • Johnson v. American Standard (2008)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing for adoption of the sophisticated user defense in California.
  • Shell Oil Co. v. United States (2008)
    United States Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that “arranger” liability under CERCLA is limited by the statute’s plain language and legislative history to those who arrange for the disposal or treatment of “waste.”
  • Van Buren v. Evans (2008)
    Amicus brief in the California Court of Appeal, defending the $250,000 limit on noneconomic damages in the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) against new constitutional attacks.

Anti-SLAPP Motions & Appeals

  • Henriks v. State Farm (2009)
    Respondent’s brief seeking affirmance of order granting anti-SLAPP motion in a lawsuit where plaintiff sought to hold insurer vicariously liable for allegedly improper actions taken by a private investigator hired by insurance defense counsel.
  • Lee v. Elghanayan (2008)
    Respondent’s brief seeking affirmance of our client’s successful anti-SLAPP motion in a lawsuit challenging the cancellation of a sub-lease resulting from an out-of-state arbitration award.
  • Laiwala v. Hynix Semiconductor America, Inc. (2008)
    Respondent’s brief seeking dismissal of plaintiff’s appeal from a demurrer and anti-SLAPP ruling as untimely because plaintiff had filed his notice of appeal within 60 days of the judgment, but more than 60 days after the grant of anti-SLAPP motion.

Business & Commercial Law

  • Shell Oil Co. v. United States (2008)
    United States Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that “arranger” liability under CERCLA is limited by the statute’s plain language and legislative history to those who arrange for the disposal or treatment of “waste.”
  • Boeken v. Phillip Morris USA (2008)
    California Supreme Court brief for Phillip Morris arguing that the doctrine of res judicata bars a plaintiff’s claim for noneconomic damages in a wrongful death action that she brought after the death of her husband, because she had dismissed with prejudice a claim for loss of consortium while he was alive.

Class Actions

  • Nelson v. Pearson Ford (2010)
    California appellate brief explaining construction of the Auto Sales Finance Act and Unfair Competition Law; challenging a judgment in favor of class action plaintiffs who claimed that aspects of an auto dealer’s purchase contracts constituted statutory violations that allowed buyers to both keep possession of their cars and obtain a windfall refund of the purchase payments for the cars.
  • Weinstat v. Dentsply (2010)
    Petition for review from appellate decision reversing decertification of class of dentists who purchased ultrasonic scaling devices, and rejecting trial court’s determination that “commonality” requirement was not met due to individualized questions of causation of injury.
  • Soualian v. Int’l Coffee and Tea, LLC (2008)
    Ninth Circuit amicus brief arguing a district court properly denied class certification in an action under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA) because certification would expose the defendant to staggering classwide statutory damages, even though putative class members suffered no actual harm.
  • Lewis v. Robinson Ford Sales, Inc. (2007)
    Petition for review in the California Supreme Court concerning the interpretation of the “injury in fact” requirement for standing under California’s Unfair Competition Law in the context of a class action alleging violations of the Automobile Sales Finance Act, and also seeking review of whether individualized inquiries required by due process render claims for punitive damages inherently unsuitable for determination on a class-wide basis.

Consumer Law

  • Nelson v. Pearson Ford (2010)
    California appellate brief explaining construction of the Auto Sales Finance Act and Unfair Competition Law; challenging a judgment in favor of class action plaintiffs who claimed that aspects of an auto dealer’s purchase contracts constituted statutory violations that allowed buyers to both keep possession of their cars and obtain a windfall refund of the purchase payments for the cars.
  • Fairbanks v. Superior Court (Farmers) (2008)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that insurers provide neither “goods” nor “services,” and thus are not subject to the Consumer Legal Remedies Act.
  • In re Tobacco II (Brown) (2007)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that, under the UCL standing requirements imposed after Proposition 64, a trial court properly denies class certification where standing cannot readily be ascertained by litigation of common questions of law and fact, and courts should not create presumptions of consumer reliance to satisfy the commonality requirement for class certification.

Entertainment Law

  • Lyle v. Warner Bros. Televisions Productions (2006)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of MPAA and other amici addressing First Amendment limits on the liability that can be imposed against a studio for sexually explicit comments made by the writers of the television show “Friends.”
  • Warner Bros. v. Golden (2005)
    Ninth Circuit appellee’s brief arguing that Warner Bros. was entitled to terminate contract to provide programming to a cable network and recover unpaid fees.

Federal Appellate Practice

  • Pacific Operators v. Valladolid (2010)
    Petition for certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve a circuit split on whether the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act’s extension of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act to outer continental shelf workers applies to injuries on land.  (Cert. granted 2/22/11.)
  • Shell Oil Co. v. United States (2008)
    United States Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that “arranger” liability under CERCLA is limited by the statute’s plain language and legislative history to those who arrange for the disposal or treatment of “waste.”
  • J.R. Simplot v. Chevron Pipeline Co. (2007)
    Tenth Circuit brief arguing that, under the Seventh Amendment, Chevron was deprived of a jury trial when the district court fixed awards of attorney fees and costs as compensatory damages.

First Amendment

  • Hebrew Academy v. Goldman (2007)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of numerous library, history and publishing organizations that resulted in an opinion holding that the single publication rule applies to written publications with “an extremely limited distribution” to bar a defamation claim on statute of limitations grounds.
  • Tory v. Cochran (2005)
    United States Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that an injunctive remedy entered by the trial court after a defamation finding was overbroad and therefore unconstitutional.

Healthcare Litigation

  • Van Buren v. Evans (2008)
    Amicus brief in the California Court of Appeal, defending the $250,000 limit on noneconomic damages in the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) against new constitutional attacks.
  • Lathrop v. Healthcare Partners Medical Group (2004)
    California Court of Appeal brief arguing that MICRA’s limit on recovery of non-economic damages applies to a medical group’s liability.
  • Piedra v. Dugan (2004)
    California Court of Appeal brief asking court to uphold a defense verdict in an action against a physician alleging lack of informed consent for treatment.

Insurance Litigation

  • Ballester v. Superior Court (2011)
    Petition for review asking the California Supreme Court to overrule Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1982) 31 Cal.3d 785 to the extent it permits discovery of private non-party information that is not directly relevant to pending litigation.
  • Jonathan Neil & Associates, Inc. v. Jones (2004)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing against the proposition that tort remedies should be available when insurer has in bad faith retroactively billed an insured for an excessive premium.
  • Hameid v. National Fire Ins. of Hartford (2003)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that covered “advertising injury” under CGL policy required widespread promotion to the public; insurer had no duty to defend insured against competitor’s action alleging misappropriation of secret customer list and one-on-one solicitation of a few customers.
  • Hamilton v. Maryland Cas. Co. (2002)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that insurer that defends insured but refuses policy limits settlement offer is not bound by stipulated judgment entered pursuant to settlement agreement between insured and third party not approved by insurer, and insurer is not liable for breach of duty to settle based on stipulated judgment.

Intellectual Property

  • Mycogen v. Monsanto (1999)
    California Supreme Court brief asking the court to affirm Court of Appeal’s reversal of $175 million judgment against Monsanto in dispute over future profits from biotechnology.

Labor & Employment Litigation

Premises Liability

  • Laico v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. (2004)
    Appellant’s opening brief arguing a property owner was not liable for injuries caused by chemicals on premises leased by plaintiff’s employer from landowner, where landowner had no knowledge of dangerous condition and exercised no control over leased premises.
  • Saelzler v. Advanced Group 400 (2001)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that the plaintiff could not show that the failure to provide additional security guards was a substantial factor in causing her injuries; a speculative possibility that additional daytime security guards or functioning entrance gates might have prevented the assault on the plaintiff was insufficient to show causation.

Pro Bono

  • Chavez v. City of Los Angeles (2009)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of public interest organizations in dispute over availability of attorney fees in low-damage discrimination cases.
  • Caso Campo Algodonero (2009)
    Amici curiae brief in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on behalf of various women’s and human rights organizations, supporting claims against Mexico under the American Convention on Human Rights and the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence Against Women.
  • Chen v. Mukasey (2008)
    Ninth Circuit brief for a man denied asylum and relief from religious persecution under the Convention Against Torture.

Products Liability & Toxic Torts

  • O'Neil v. Crane Co. (2010)
    California Supreme Court brief arguing that a defendant cannot be liable for injuries caused by a product it did not manufacture or distribute.
  • Johnson v. American Standard (2008)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing for adoption of the sophisticated user defense in California.
  • Norris v. Crane Co. (2008)
    Petition for review to the California Supreme Court, asking the court to revisit the causation and liability standards for asbestos cases in which the plaintiff had minimal bystander exposure to the defendant’s product.
  • Lockheed Litigation Cases (2005)
    California Supreme Court merits brief arguing that trial judges have authority under the California Evidence Code to exclude from the jury’s consideration expert testimony lacking in adequate foundation.

Public Entity Liability

Punitive Damages

  • Simon v. San Paolo U.S. Holding Co., Inc. (2005)
    California Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce and others, arguing that an appellate court cannot affirm a punitive damages award based on an alleged “loss” that the Legislature has determined to be noncompensable.
  • Romo v. Ford Motor Co. (2003)
    United States Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of twenty leading manufacturers in support of a petition for certiorari, arguing that punitive damages should not be awarded against a manufacturer for conduct that complies with regulatory standards and industry custom.
  • State Farm v. Campbell Mut. Auto Ins. Co. v. Campbell (2003)
    United States Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of a group of insurers, arguing that an insurer’s gross assets or policyholders’ surplus should not be a basis for affirming a punitive damages award.

Real Property Litigation

More than 50 years of specializing in civil appeals