Supreme Court permits statutory reduction of Three Strikes sentence that dissent calls an “endorse[ment] [of] legislative overreach”

Jason R. Litt

Partner
Los Angeles
jlitt@horvitzlevy.com
818.995.0800

Having led cases resulting in significant published decisions and successful trial court outcomes, clients seek Jason Litt’s insights and judgment in the fields of insurance bad faith, government entity litigation, products liability law, employment law, trade secret law, and attorney fees.

Jason joined the firm in 2001 and became a partner in 2008. Jason is one of the managing partners of the firm, a member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers, and a member of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity, an organization consisting of general counsel of major corporations and managing partners of leading law firms, dedicated to promoting diversity in the legal profession.

Prior to joining the firm, Jason was a civil rights attorney specializing in complex housing, employment and government entity litigation, and an Internet entrepreneur.

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.

Al Shikha v. Lyft (2024)

In a published opinion, California Court of Appeal holds there is no common-law duty to run criminal background checks on passengers before they can be permitted to use the Lyft rideshare app.

In re: John Kirkland v. USBC, Los Angeles (2023)

Ninth Circuit rules that a geographical limitation on subpoena powers applies to remote appearances.

Guardianship of Saul H. (2022)

California Supreme Court reverses Court of Appeal, holding Horvitz & Levy's client is entitled to state court findings allowing him to apply to the federal government for Special Immigrant Juvenile status.

Sandoval v. Qualcomm (2021)

California Supreme Court reaffirms Privette doctrine, overturning $3.7 million jury verdict and directing changes to model jury instructions

Jogani v. Jogani (2021)

California Court of Appeal affirms judgment in favor of Horvitz & Levy client in partnership dispute, holding all of plaintiffs’ claims were time-barred

Putt v. Ford Motor Co. (2021)

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

Curry v. Academy Pointe, Inc. (2020)

California Court of Appeal reduces $4.5 million punitive damages award to $750,000 in reasonable accommodation case against apartment owner and manager

Alexander v. Community Hospital of Long Beach (2020)

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

Samora v. Muhammad (2019)

Court of Appeal affirms favorable judgment for defendants in personal injury case

Kealy v. Ford Motor Credit Company (2019)

Horvitz & Levy obtains reversal of jury verdict finding Ford Credit responsible for erroneous credit reporting and secures an affirmance of the dismissal of plaintiff’s Business and Professions Code section 17200 (UCL) claim before trial

Hart v. Special Electric (2018)

Horvitz & Levy prevails on statute of repose issue in asbestos lawsuit.

TIG Insurance v. Culpepper (2018)

Qui tam action against perpetrator of insurance fraud reinstated.

Armstrong v. Kaplon (2017)

Ninth Circuit reaffirms that criminal restitution orders are not dischargeable in bankruptcy

RunflatAmerica, LLC v. Michelin North America, Inc. et al. (2014)

California Court of Appeal rules for defendants in a shareholder derivative action brought by the former CEO of a company, who alleged his company should have sued the defendants for perceived business torts.

O’Neil v. Crane Co. (2012)

California Supreme Court holds that product manufacturers cannot be liable for injuries caused by replacement parts.

Walton et al. v. The William Powell Co. (2010)

California Court of Appeal reverses $5 million judgment in asbestos case, holding that valve maker is not liable as a matter of law for asbestos that was used in conjunction with its product.

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.

Publications