
Clients and trial counsel often leverage Karen Bray’s proficiency in identifying and preserving issues for potential appellate review.
In that capacity, she has assisted trial counsel in a vast array of cases with summary judgment motions, motions in limine, jury instructions, trial briefs, verdict forms, and post-trial motions. She has also represented clients embroiled in complex appeals involving a variety of torts, Proposition 213’s bar against recovery of noneconomic damages by uninsured motorists, discovery sanctions, Proposition 51 and fault apportionment, punitive damages, breach of contract, insurance coverage and bad faith, default judgments, premises liability, and evolving law concerning the evidence admissible and the amount recoverable for medical expense damages. Clients also rely on Karen to provide candid assessments concerning the likelihood of securing relief on appeal, allowing them to realistically evaluate when settlement will be in their best interests.
Karen is a managing partner at the firm, where she has focused on appellate litigation and trial consulting since 2000. Prior to joining the firm, Karen was a Litigation Associate with Perkins Coie.
Representative Matters
Abbassi v. UC Regents (2025)
California Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment for The UC Regents in litigation alleging discrimination and harassment.
Read MoreWaszczuk v. UC Regents (2023)
Horvitz & Levy successfully defendant a summary judgment entered in favor of the UC Regents against a vexatious litigant.
Read MoreAlSayyad v. The Regents of The University of California (2023)
California Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment in favor of employer based on lack of evidence of discriminatory motive for employee’s three-year suspension.
Read MoreLe v. The Regents of The University of California (2023)
California Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment in favor of employer based on absence of causal link between protected activity and alleged retaliatory act.
Read MoreDavis v. Harano (2022)
California Court of Appeal affirms defense verdict in personal injury action, accepting Horvitz & Levy’s invited error and substantial evidence arguments.
Read MoreBirden v. Regents of the University of California (2021)
California Court of Appeal reverses award of economic damages against Horvitz & Levy’s client in workplace discrimination and harassment action
Read MoreMann v. The Regents of the University of California (2021)
Court of Appeal affirms judgment on FEHA claims for the UC Regents, finding no error or prejudice in verdict form or jury instructions
Read MorePinto v. Farmers Insurance Exchange (2021)
Court of Appeal holds that an insurer’s failure to accept a reasonable settlement demand is not per se unreasonable, disapproving a controversial model jury instruction
Read MoreHernandez v. First Student, Inc. (2019)
California Court of Appeal affirmed judgment allocating eighty percent of fault to the plaintiff who darted into the street on his bicycle
Read MoreCuevas v. Contra Costa County (2017)
California Court of Appeal requires retrial of future medical expense claim to permit evidence of Medicaid and Affordable Care Act benefits
Read MoreCann v. Stefanec (2013)
Court of Appeal holds that primary assumption of risk doctrine bars suit by college swimmer injured in weight room accident.
Read MoreTamas v. T.L. Pavlich Construction, Inc. (2013)
California Court of Appeal holds that jurors did not commit misconduct by using toy cars during deliberations to visualize auto accident.
Read MoreIbarra v. Carpinello (2011)
California Court of Appeal affirms dismissal of defamation lawsuit in high-profile MMA dispute.
Read MoreIn re Pineda (2011)
Horvitz & Levy petition to California Supreme Court results in reconsideration of ruling against abused minor.
Read MoreFire Insurance Exchange v. Superior Court (2010)
California Court of Appeal issues writ of mandate, directing trial court to grant summary judgment in favor of insurer in coverage dispute.
Read MoreCredentials
Education
- University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law
J.D., Editor in Chief of the Law Review, 1993 - University of California, Los Angeles
B.A./B.A., Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude, 1990
Clerkships
- Hon. Arthur L. Alarcon, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (1993-1994)
Bar Admissions
- California
- U.S. Supreme Court
- U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Professional Associations
Awards
- Super Lawyers (2015-2025)
Publications
- Colorado Supreme Court Decides Collateral Source Rule Does Not Apply in Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Claim Cases (June 24, 2021) Washington Legal Foundation, Legal Backgrounders
- Colorado Supreme Court Appears Unlikely to Resolve Question On Appropriate Measure of Medical Damages Personal-Injury Plaintiffs Can Recover (September 29, 2020) Washington Legal Foundation, Legal Pulse
- In Scholle, Colorado Supreme Court Should Clarify Collateral Source Rule’s Application to Medical Expense Damages (March 6, 2020) Washington Legal Foundation, Legal Backgrounder
- Drive Responsibly (Sept. 2017) Los Angeles Lawyer
- Defending Against Claims for Future Medical Expense Damages (Vol. 1, 2017) Verdict, p. 17
- Appellate Counsel Can Have Key Role at Trial (Aug./Sept. 2015) Today’s General Counsel, Vol. 12, No. 4, p. 60
- Federal Health Insurance Mandates and the Impending Upheaval of the Collateral Source Rule (Jan. 29, 2015) Washington Legal Foundation, Contemporary Legal Note, No. 76
- Trade Secret Misappropriation Damages, and The Underused “Head Start” Doctrine Defense (Vol. 2, 2013) Verdict, p. 17
- Petitions for Rehearing in the Court of Appeal (May, 2011) LACBA E-Publication, Vol. II, No. 20
- Briefing Deadlines and Extensions in the Court of Appeal (Sept. 2010) LACBA E-Publication, Vol. II, No. 12
- Appellate Counsel Part of the Litigation Team: Early Involvement of Appellate Attorneys May Aid in Trial and Improve the Chances of a Successful Appeal (July 20, 2010) The Recorder [online exclusive]
- Reaching the Final Chapter in the Story of Peremptory Challenges (1992) 40 UCLA L. Rev. 517
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