How David Helps Clients

David Axelrad advises clients, including numerous Fortune 500 companies, with the benefit of over 40 years specializing in civil appeals. He regularly counsels clients on toxic tort and personal injury cases, and guides clients through the process of preserving the record in the trial court, attacking judgments in the trial court through post trial motions, staying enforcement of judgments, and perfecting an appeal. David is also a leader in providing value added briefings and educational seminars to clients on a wide variety of topics, and writes extensively on topics related to the civil appellate process.

---

David is a partner at the firm, where he has practiced since 1982. He is a California State Bar Certified Appellate Specialist, and has handled hundreds of civil appeals in state and federal courts, including cases in the California Supreme Court. Prior to joining Horvitz & Levy, David was an Assistant to the Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission in Washington, D.C. David also served as a Staff Attorney for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Mr. Axelrad has been an Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of La Verne College of Law and Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

Representative Matters

People v. Conagra Grocery Products et al. (2017)
California Court of Appeal reversed a judgment concerning the application of public nuisance law to the promotion of consumer products.

Hartford Casualty Ins. Co. v. J.R. Marketing, LLC (2015)
California Supreme Court held that insurers who pay excessive attorney fees to Cumis counsel are entitled to seek reimbursement directly from Cumis counsel itself, rather than from the insured.

Lockheed Litigation (2015)
Multiple state court appeals and trial court consultation concerning admissibility of expert testimony in toxic tort litigation and sufficiency of evidence to support punitive damages; savings to clients of $760 million.

Jankey v. Lee (2012)
California Supreme Court affirmed lower court decision concerning the availability of attorney fee awards in state disability rights litigation.

Kibler v. Northern Inyo County Local Hospital District (2006)
California Supreme Court affirmed lower court decision extending the protection of California’s anti-SLAPP statute to hospital peer review proceedings.

Advanced Bionics Corp. v. Medtronic, Inc. (2002)
California Supreme Court reversed lower court decision concerning judicial restraint and comity in the context of interstate anti-suit injunctions.

J.C. Penney Casualty Ins. Co. v. M.K. (1991)
California Supreme Court clarified the law governing “willful acts” excluded from insurance coverage.

Education

• University of California College of the Law, San Francisco (formerly Hastings)
  J.D., 1977
• Stanford University
  B.A., with distinction, 1972

Clerkships

• Staff Attorney, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (1977-1978)

Bar Admissions

• California
• U.S. Supreme Court
• U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
• U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
• U.S. District Court, Central District of California

Professional Associations

• American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, Fellow
• Association of Southern California Defense Counsel
• California Academy of Appellate Lawyers, Member
• Chancery Club
• DRI, Board of Directors (2016-2019), Chair, Amicus Committee (2014-2016)
• Los Angeles County Bar Association
• California State Bar, Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation (2014-2017)
• Association of Business Trial Lawyers, Board of Governors - Los Angeles (2012-2015)

Awards

• Top rankings from Chambers & Partners USA both in California and nationally
• Best Lawyers (2006-2023)
• Super Lawyers (2004-2024)
• Top Ten Southern California Super Lawyers in 2015
• California Lawyer Attorney of the Year (CLAY) Award (2011) for his work in the field of Legal Ethics
• “AV Preeminent” rated by Martindale Hubbell

Publications

• Retroactivity of appellate court decisions: The truth is out there (August 09, 2023) Daily Journal 
• When is a partial appeal bond sufficient? (March 20, 2023) Daily Journal
• Shorter is better (February 15, 2023) Daily Journal
• Contours of safe harbor defense continue to shift (July 22, 2022) Daily Journal
• Appellate Review of the Failure to Exercise Discretion (April 21, 2022) Daily Journal
• The 'Advisory Opinion' Doctrine of Our Appellate Courts (March 15, 2022) Daily Journal
• Newly Discovered Evidence on Appeal: The Writ of Error Coram Vobis (Feb. 3, 2022) Daily Journal
• The Effect of Reversal on Appeal (Nov. 19, 2021) Daily Journal
• Judicial Notice (Sep. 20, 2021) Daily Journal
• The Limits of the Appellate Process and Effective Storytelling (May 12, 2021) Daily Journal
• The Importance of Judicial Economy (May 7, 2021) Daily Journal
• Errors Relating to the Presence of a Jury (March 8, 2021) Daily Journal
• The Disappearing "Ink" Signature (Fall 2020) ABTL Report
• Staying Power 2.0 (July/August 2020) Los Angeles Lawyer
• Post-Trial Motions Can Be Key To California Appeals (Dec. 7, 2016) Law360
• The Supreme Court Vacancy And An Equally Divided Court (Oct. 21, 2016) Law360
• The Defense Bar’s Voice in the U.S. Supreme Court (July 2016) For The Defense [DRI], p. 8
• Appellate Counsel Can Have Key Role at Trial (Aug./Sept. 2015) Today's General Counsel, Vol. 12, No. 4, p. 60
• Calif. Fixes Timing Problem for Post-Trial Motions (Jan. 8, 2015) Law360
• Briefing Between Brevity and Boredom (Aug. 29, 2014) Daily Journal., p. 1
• Did You Know? Appealability Depends on the Legislature (Summer 2014) ABTL Report, Vol. XXXIV, No. 4, p. 8
• From Secrecy to Disclosure (Aug. 5, 2013) The Recorder
• Regulatory Risk Assessment and Tort Liability (Vol. 1, 2013) Verdict, p. 30
• Counselor, Are You Reading Your Oral Argument? (Jan. 24, 2014) Daily Journal, p. 7
• The Certification Process (July 9, 2012) The Recorder [online exclusive]
• The Conflict Over Medicare's 'Full Reimbursement' Rule (June & July 2012) Medical Malpractice Law & Strategy, Vol. 29, Nos. 9 & 10 [two-part article]
• Sanchez v. Strickland and the Measure of Damages in California for Past Medical Expenses (Winter 2012) Legal Insights, p. 15
• Limiting Windfall Damages (Feb. 2012) Medical Malpractice Law & Strategy, Vol. 29, No. 5, p. 1
• Appellate Practice in Federal and State Courts (2011) Law Journal Press
• The Supreme Court of California Rules on Santa Clara Contingency Fee Issue - Backpedals on Clancy (July 2011) IADC Defense Counsel Journal
• Appeals, Writs and Post-Trial Motions (Cal. State Bar, Lit. Section, Oct. 2010) 2009 California Litigation Review
• Suggestive Palma Notices (Nov. 2010) California Lawyer, 40
• Annual Review (20th ed. Feb. 2010) [May take a few minutes to download; click Bookmarks to view table of contents]
• A Conversation on the Appellate Process (Nov. 2009) 51 For the Defense 26
• Staying Enforcement During Appeal (May 2009 Cont.Ed.Bar) Cal. Civil Appellate Practice, ch. 6
• Tort Reform Damage Caps in California, and Beyond (Apr. 2009) Medical Malpractice Law & Strategy, Vol. 28, No. 7, p. 5
• The Constitutionality of Tort Reform Damage Caps (Mar. 2009) Medical Malpractice Law & Strategy, Vol. 27, No. 6, p. 1
• Staying Enforcement of A Money Judgment Pending Appeal: An Overview (Aug. 2008) IADC Appellate Practice Committee Newsletter
• Lack of Informed Consent vs. Battery: Stepping In for the Defense (Apr. 2008) Medical Malpractice Law & Strategy, Vol. 25, No. 7, p. 1
• Lack of Informed Consent vs. Battery: Keeping the Two Straight (Mar. 2008) Medical Malpractice Law & Strategy, Vol. 25, No. 6, p. 1
• Pay Judges More (Jan. 14, 2008) Los Angeles Times
• Increasing Pay for Federal Judges (Dec. 28, 2007) Lawdragon.com
• Appeals, Writs and Post-Trial Motions (Cal. State Bar, Lit. Section, July 2008) 2007 California Litigation Review
• Anti-SLAPP Statutes and Peer Review (Nov. 2006) Medical Malpractice Law & Strategy, Vo. 24, No. 2A, p. 7
• Justices Will Give Guidance on Excluding Expert Testimony (Aug. 23, 2006) L.A. Daily J. p. 8
• It's About Time Federal Judges Got a Living Wage (July 31, 2006) L.A. Daily J., p. 8
• The Abiding Appeal of the Concept of Legislative Due Process (April 2006) 29 Los Angeles Lawyer, p. 92
• Appeals, Writs and Post-Trial Motions (Cal. State Bar, Lit. Section, June 2007) 2006 California Litigation Review
• Why California's Anti-SLAPP Statute Should Apply to Peer Review (Nov. 2005) Medical Malpractice Law & Strategy, Vol. 23, No. 11, p. 1
• New Standards for Expert Testimony (July 2005) California Lawyer
• The Statutory Framework for Appeal Bonds (June 2005) Los Angeles Lawyer
• The Appellate Process: Preserving A Case for Appeal (A.B.A. Torts & Ins. Prac. Sec., Appellate Advoc. Com., Chicago, Ill.) (Summer 2005) Vol. 7, No. 4
• Appeals, Writs and Post-Trial Motions (Cal. State Bar, Lit. Section, July 2006) 2005 California Litigation Review
• Problematic New Civil Jury Instructions (May 2004) California Lawyer, 20
• CA Court Excludes Medical Expert Causation Testimony (Apr. 2004) Medical Malpractice Law & Strategy, Vol. 21, No. 6, p. 1
• Appeals, Writs and Post-Trial Motions (Cal. State Bar, Lit. Section, Sept. 2005) 2004 California Litigation Review
• Appeals, Writs and Post-Trial Motions (Cal. State Bar, Lit. Section, Nov. 2004) 2003 California Litigation Review
• California's "Little FTC Act": Benefitting Consumers, or Lawyers? (Dec. 4, 1998) Wash. Legal Found. Legal Backgrounder, Vol. 13, No. 46
• California Supreme Court Review (1988) Cal. Forms of Pleading and Practice, ch. 54
• The Federal General Verdict Rule: Conflict in the Courts of Appeal (June 1996) The Federal Lawyer
• Staying Power (Nov. 1995) Los Angeles Lawyer
• Insurance Coverage for "Wilful Acts": Clarifying Clemmer (Sept. 1991) L.A. Lawyer