Justice Grodin memorial to precede three-case November calendar

Bradley S. Pauley

Partner
San Francisco
bpauley@horvitzlevy.com
415.462.5600

Clients embroiled in complex business disputes seek Brad Pauley’s extensive capabilities in trial strategy, post-trial motions, high-stakes civil appeals, and writ proceedings.

His instincts are also sought after in substantive matters involving employment law, government conflicts of interest, premises liability, anti-SLAPP appeals, and insurance coverage and bad faith.

Brad has argued numerous cases before the appellate courts reversing substantial damages awards against his clients. He took the lead in briefing and arguing an appeal that resulted in the reversal of a $23 million judgment against Horvitz & Levy’s client, a school district, in a case involving cutting edge issues of government conflict of interest law. On another occasion, he took the lead on an appeal that resulted in the reversal of a $30 million verdict against his client, a major national gaming corporation, in a dispute over the development of an Indian casino. In the employment arena, after an adverse multi-million dollar jury verdict in a multi-plaintiff FEHA discrimination and hostile work environment case, he obtained a complete reversal with directions to enter judgment for Horvitz & Levy’s clients. And, in the insurance bad faith arena, he argued the California Supreme Court case that made the “genuine dispute” doctrine the law of the land.

He served as President of the Los Angeles County Bar Association from 2021-2022, one of the nation’s oldest and largest metropolitan bar associations. Before joining the firm, Brad was an associate with Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP, where he worked on a broad variety of complex commercial litigation matters.

Credentials

Education

Bar Admissions

Professional Associations

Awards

Representative Matters

Zenith Insurance v. WCAB (Hernandez) (2025)

California Court of Appeal reverses Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board and holds that injury sustained by employee in vanpool on commute home is not compensable under the going and coming rule.

Li v. Cole Haan LLC (2024)

California Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment for owner of retail store in premises liability action.

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior Court (South San Joaquin Irrigation District) (2023)

California Court of Appeal holds that, in a utility takings case, a public entity's findings of public necessity and "more necessary public use" are not reviewed by the trial court only for substantial evidence or a gross abuse of discretion.

Pulliam v. USC (2022)

California Court of Appeal affirms defense verdict in wrongful termination action.

Carradine v. iDrip Vape LLC (2021)

California Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment, holding the “going-and-coming” rule precludes vicarious liability against a business for a car accident that occurred during the business owner’s commute.

Birden 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

Rios v. The Regents of the University of California (2021)

California Court of Appeal affirms dismissal of employment action for plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies

Jarecki v. Zitter (2020)

Trial court grants post-trial relief in nuisance and trespass case, slashing damages by more than 70 percent

Alexander v. Community Hospital of Long Beach (2020)

Court of Appeal reverses a discrimination and hostile work environment judgment against Horvitz & Levy’s client

City of San Juan Capistrano v. Cal. Public Utilities Comm’n (2019)

Representing amicus curiae San Diego Gas & Electric (Sempra), Horvitz & Levy persuades Ninth Circuit to affirm the dismissal of an action seeking to derail Sempra’s construction project.

Huerta v. Kava Holdings, Inc. (2018)

California Court of Appeal affirms judgment for hotel in FEHA case.

Strategic Concepts, LLC v. Beverly Hills Unified School District (2018)

California Court of Appeal applies conflict of interest law to reverse $23 million breach of contract judgment against school district.

Martinez v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co. (2017)

California Court of Appeal affirms judgment in favor of power line clearing contractor in negligence action

Lozano v. AWI Management Corporation (2016)

California Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment that found apartment manager not liable for shooting rampage

Milhouse v. Travelers Commercial Ins. Co. (2016)

Ninth Circuit rules in favor of insurer in dispute over payment of benefits for home destroyed in wildfire

Central Metal v. Center Bank (2015)

California Court of Appeal affirms grant of anti-SLAPP motion in action arising from commercial lender’s receivership action

Corenbaum v. Lampkin (2013)

California Court of Appeal holds that evidence of “billed” but unpaid medical expenses is not admissible to prove future medical damages or noneconomic damages.

Attitudes Hair & Nail Salon v. Superior Court (2011)

California Court of Appeal issues peremptory writ reversing denial of summary judgment in case involving Unruh Act and Disabled Persons Act.

State Farm v. Lee (2011)

California Court of Appeal affirms order granting motion to strike cross-complaint for abuse of process.

Li v. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP (2010)

California Court of Appeal affirms order denying motion to strike malicious prosecution action against Simpson Thacher & Bartlett.

PrediWave Corporation v. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett et al. (2009)

California Court of Appeal reverses trial court order that dismissed $2 billion attorney malpractice suit under anti-SLAPP statute.

Pauma Band of Luiseño Mission Indians v. Harrah’s Operating Company, Inc. (2009)

California Court of Appeal reverses $30 million judgment in business dispute arising from negotiations to develop and manage a hotel and casino on an Indian reservation.

Kavu v. Omnipak (2007)

Fax-blasting case settles on favorable terms after Horvitz & Levy petitions the Ninth Circuit for interlocutory appeal of class certification order.

Reigelsperger v. Siller (2007)

California Supreme Court upholds enforceability of arbitration agreement under MICRA.

Publications