Emily V. Cuatto

Partner

Los Angeles

ecuatto@horvitzlevy.com 818.995.0800

vCard

Overview Representative Matters Credentials Publications

Jump To

Emily Cuatto is a Certified Appellate Specialist who has appeared as lead appellate counsel on behalf of numerous clients, including automobile manufacturers, healthcare entities, and large insurers in the California, Oregon, and Nevada Supreme Courts, the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and the California Court of Appeal. In addition to her work briefing and arguing appeals, she frequently partners with trial teams to develop legal strategies and preserve appellate issues during trial. She has served as appellate and trial counsel in a wide range of civil practice areas, including insurance coverage, business torts, catastrophic personal injury, and products liability.

Emily serves on the California Lawyers’ Association Business Law Section Insurance Law Committee and coordinates the firm’s pro bono efforts. Emily is a past recipient of the Harriett Buhai Center for Family Law’s Volunteer of the Year award for her work representing on appeal a mother seeking expanded visitation rights with her son.

Emily is a 2016 Fellow of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD). The LCLD is an organization of more than 200 members who serve as either general counsel of major corporations or managing partners of leading law firms. LCLD develops action programs designed to help a new and more diverse generation of attorneys ascend to positions of leadership.

Before joining Horvitz & Levy, Emily worked in the Santa Monica office of Bingham McCutchen LLP, where she handled a variety of complex commercial litigation matters involving insurance coverage, contracts, employment, and business torts.

Between college and law school, Emily taught middle school special education in New Orleans, Louisiana, through the Teach for America program.

Representative Matters

Shorter v. Baca (III) (2025)

Horvitz & Levy, as court-appointed amicus counsel, files successful pro bono brief in support of a former pretrial detainee.

Navarro v. Cervera (2025)

California Court of Appeal publishes opinion holding that a statute providing procedural safeguards for ER surgeons against medical malpractice claims also protects other physicians who consult remotely with the ER department

Lloyd v. Byrd Technologies (2024)

California Court of Appeal affirms judgment for product defendant, rejecting plaintiff’s challenge to the trial court’s response to jury questions.

Watts v. Pneumo Abex (2024)

California Court of Appeal reverses for new trial in asbestos case.

Garcia v. GEICO (2024)

Ninth Circuit affirms summary judgment for insurer in bad faith action based on insurer’s decision not to accept policy limits settlement offer that would have released only one of two insureds.

Carolina Beverage Corp. v. FIJI Water (2024)

California Court of Appeal reverses $6 million award and holds that “constructive termination” of a commercial distribution contract is not a viable theory of recovery under California common law.

Tinoco v. Michelin North America, Inc. (2024)

California Court of Appeal affirms summary adjudication for tire manufacturer in $99.7 million products liability case.

Cheesman v. Ford Motor Co. (2024)

Washington Court of Appeals affirms defense summary judgment in product liability action.

Jones v. Ford (2023)

Ninth Circuit holds plaintiffs lack viable privacy claims based on using the infotainment system in their Ford vehicle.

Coston v. Nangalama (2021)

Ninth Circuit orders a new trial on prisoner’s Eighth Amendment claim for denial of medical care.

Shorter v. Baca (2021)

Ninth Circuit holds that former jail inmate is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on her excessive search and inadequate sanitation claims.

Yahoo!, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA (2021)

Ninth Circuit rejects insured’s argument for contract damages exceeding the benefit of the insurance bargain

Putt v. Ford Motor Co. (2021)

Court of Appeal reverses multimillion dollar jury verdict finding Ford 100% at fault in an asbestos case

Jack v. DCo, LLC (2021)

Ninth Circuit holds Ford did not cause decedent’s death by failing to supply a post-sale warning about asbestos

Newman v. Larios (2020)

California Court of Appeal affirms judgment based on insurer’s acceptance of plaintiff’s tactical settlement offer

Michery v. Ford (2019)

Horvitz & Levy obtains affirmance of jury verdict finding Ford’s 1999 Expedition was not defectively designed.

Stennett v. Miller (2019)

California Court of Appeal upholds wrongful death statute against equal protection challenge.

Licudine v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (2019)

California Court of Appeal affirms trial court ruling that a plaintiff's Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offer was served too early to be in good faith.

Kaur v. Broadbase (2018)

Horvitz & Levy obtains dismissal of appeal in wrongful death suit.

Victaulic v. American Home Assurance Company (2018)

Court of Appeal reverses $52 million Brandt fee and punitive damages award in insurance bad faith case.

Rainwater v. Sergio’s El Ranchito, Inc. (2017)

Court of Appeal upholds summary judgment.

Ochoa-Valenzuela v. Ford Motor Company (2017)

Ninth Circuit affirms defense verdict in a products liability action arising from a single-vehicle rollover accident

Edwards v. Ford Motor Company (2017)

Ninth Circuit affirms district court decision that consumer expectations test for product defect does not apply to roof strength in a rollover accident

Licudine v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (2016)

California Court of Appeal publishes helpful opinion on “lost earning capacity” damages

Hartford Casualty Insurance Company v. J.R. Marketing, L.L.C. (2015)

California Supreme Court permits insurers to seek reimbursement directly from Cumis counsel for objectively unreasonable billings.

Albert v. Mid-Century Insurance Co. (2015)

California Court of Appeal holds that trespass to trees is not covered by a general liability policy.

R.R. v. H.F. (2014)

California Court of Appeal orders trial court to enforce mother's rights to legal custody and reconsider her request for greater visitation with her now six-year-old child.

Cann v. Stefanec (2013)

Court of Appeal holds that primary assumption of risk doctrine bars suit by college swimmer injured in weight room accident.

Credentials

Education

University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law
J.D., 2008
Stanford University
B.A., 2003

Clerkships

Hon. Milan D. Smith, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (2009-2010)
Hon. R. Gary Klausner, U.S. District Court, Central District of California (2006) (extern)

Bar Admissions

California
Oregon
Washington
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
U.S. District Court, Central District of California
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California
U.S. District Court, Northern District of California

Professional Associations

California Lawyers’ Association, Business Law Section, Insurance Law Standing Committee
Association of Southern California Defense Counsel
Leadership Council on Legal Diversity
Los Angeles County Bar Association

Awards

Super Lawyers “Rising Stars” (2014-2018)
Top 50 Women Rising Stars in Southern California
Pro Bono Volunteer of the Year Award, Harriett Buhai Center for Family Law (2014)

Publications

Insurance Law Update, California Lawyers’ Association 2020 Annual Business Law Review (forthcoming)
Co-Author, Green Sheets, ASCDC Verdict Magazine (2014-present)
Returning to Rutherford: A Call to California Courts to Rejoin the Legal Mainstream and Require Causation be Proved in Asbestos Cases under Traditional Torts Principles (Nov. 23, 2016) Southwestern Law Review
When Interpreting Ambiguous Terms, Consistency Prevails (Nov. 12, 2014) Daily J., Insurance Supplement, p. 9
From Secrecy to Disclosure (Aug. 5, 2013) The Recorder
In Practice: Post-Trial Motions — To File or Not (June 26, 2013) The Recorder

Put Our Proven Appellate Expertise to Work for You.

For over 60 years, we've preserved judgments, reversed errors, and reduced awards in some of California’s most high-profile appellate cases.

Explore our practices Explore Careers