Representative Briefs

In appellate practice, cases are decided primarily based on written briefs.  With over thirty lawyers focusing exclusively on appeals, Horvitz & Levy LLP writes hundreds of briefs every year.  Below are just a few examples of briefs we have filed on behalf of our clients in each of our major practice areas.  

Amicus Support and Shaping the Law

  • Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (2015) View PDF
    California Supreme Court brief arguing that if the Industrial Welfare Commission wage order definitions of “employer” govern whether workers are employees rather than independent contractors, those definitions are not meaningfully different from the common law test for making that determination.
  • MHN Government Services, Inc. v. Zaborowski (2015) View PDF
    United States Supreme Court brief tracing the history of California courts’ application of unconscionability rules to avoid enforcing arbitration agreements, and arguing that California’s unconscionability standards are preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.
Read More...

Anti-SLAPP Motions & Appeals

  • Malin v. Singer (2012) View PDF
    Appellants’ opening brief arguing that a pre-lawsuit demand letter on behalf of a client is protected by the First Amendment and the litigation privilege.
  • Henriks v. State Farm (2009) View PDF
    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.
Read More...

Business & Commercial Law

Read More...

Class Actions

Read More...

Consumer Law

  • Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., LLC (2012)  View PDF
    California Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California unconscionability standard that invalidates arbitration procedures to the extent they unduly favor one party over the other, and that in any event such arbitration procedures are not unconscionable under state law because they do not shock the conscience.
  • Nelson v. Pearson Ford (2010) View PDF
    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.
Read More...

Entertainment Law

Read More...

Federal Appellate Practice

Read More...

First Amendment

  • Hebrew Academy v. Goldman (2007) View PDF
    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) View PDF
    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.
Read More...

Healthcare Litigation

  • Van Buren v. Evans (2008) View PDF
    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) View PDF
    California Court of Appeal brief arguing that MICRA’s limit on recovery of non-economic damages applies to a medical group’s liability.
Read More...

Insurance Litigation

  • Farmers Insurance Co. of Washington v. Moratti (2012) View PDF
    United States Supreme Court amicus brief arguing that “covenant judgments” between insurance policyholders and third-party tort claimants are inherently collusive, and that Washington courts violate due process by conclusively presuming that the amounts of such judgments are the measure of damages in subsequent bad faith actions against insurers.
  • Ballester v. Superior Court (2011) View PDF
    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.
Read More...

Intellectual Property

  • Omega S.A. v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (2012) View PDF
    Ninth Circuit brief arguing that designer of luxury watches did not misuse its copyright in an artistic design by enforcing the exclusive rights conferred by that copyright to control the distribution of the copyrighted design as engraved on its watches.
Read More...

Labor & Employment Litigation

  • Sheridan v. Touchstone Television Productions, LLC (2015) View PDF
    Petition asking the California Supreme Court petition to grant review in Desperate Housewives employment dispute, to clarify the scope of the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine.
  • Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (2015) View PDF
    California Supreme Court brief arguing that if the Industrial Welfare Commission wage order definitions of “employer” govern whether workers are employees rather than independent contractors, those definitions are not meaningfully different from the common law test for making that determination.
Read More...

Premises Liability

  • Laico v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. (2004) View PDF
    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) View PDF
    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.
Read More...

Pro Bono

Read More...

Products Liability & Toxic Torts

Read More...

Public Entity Liability

Read More...

Punitive Damages

  • Maddox v. Nissan Motor Company, Ltd. et al. (2014) View PDF
    Kentucky Supreme Court brief arguing that punitive damages should not be permitted, as a general rule, against product manufacturers who comply with all applicable government safety requirements.
  • Bixby v. KBR, Inc. (2013) View PDF
    Ninth Circuit amicus brief arguing that punitive damages cannot be imposed under state law to regulate conduct in a foreign nation.
Read More...

Real Property Litigation

Read More...