Attorney Search
Advocacy at a Higher Level

Horvitz & Levy is a solutions-based firm focused on appellate success. We are distinguished by our commitment to responsive service and on-going innovation in the areas of civil appellate litigation, amicus curiae support, and trial strategy consultation.

Our firm history, honors and awards, and locations speak to our collaborative approach and commitment to serving clients as well as the outstanding legal resources we bring to bear.

Steven  Fleischman

Steven Fleischman

Partner - Los Angeles Office

How Steven Helps Clients

Businesses, insurance companies and high net worth individuals seek Steven (Steve) Fleischman’s expertise in litigating commercial disputes and his substantive knowledge in professional liability, anti-SLAPP, insurance coverage, real estate, and the recovery of attorney fees.

Steve also has expertise in litigating the proper standards for the recovery of medical damages in personal injury cases under Howell v. Hamilton Meats & Provisions, Inc. (2011) and its progeny. Steve helps clients shape the law through the use of amicus briefs and, as co-chair of the Amicus Committee of the Association of Southern California Defense Counsel, he is responsible for supervising and overseeing the filing of dozens of amicus briefs and letters in California and federal courts.

He is especially proud of his work representing the prevailing party in Manufactured Home Comm. v. County of San Luis Obispo (2008), where the court wrote: “The Constitution protects everyone, the poor, the wealthy, the weak, the powerful, the guilty and the innocent” and his appellate advocacy has been complimented by appellate justices in a published opinion. He has been lead counsel in over 75 appeals and writ proceedings before the California Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuit Courts of Appeals. Steve is a certified appellate specialist and member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers.

Steve is a partner at the firm.  He has also authored dozens of amicus curiae filings in appellate proceedings, including amicus briefing on the merits before the California Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court.

Representative Matters

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.

In re: John Kirkland v. USBC, Los Angeles (2023)
Ninth Circuit rules that a geographical limitation on subpoena powers applies to remote appearances.

Franklin v. Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital (2022)
Horvitz & Levy successfully defends summary judgment for hospital in medical malpractice action on actual and ostensible agency grounds.

Brown v. El Dorado Union High School District (2022)
California Court of Appeal affirms dismissal of football injury lawsuit against high school district, finding no evidence of gross negligence and clarifying summary judgment procedure.

Riskin v. Downtown LA Property Owners Association (2022)
California Court of Appeal reverses attorney fees award in California Public Records Act case.

Mallonee v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. (2022)
California Court of Appeal affirms order cutting attorney fees request by 85 percent in lemon law action.

Aghaian v. Minassian II (2021)
California Court of Appeal affirms $34.5 million judgment for Horvitz & Levy clients, holding that “law of the case” precluded defendant’s inconvenient forum motion.

Brown v. USA Taekwondo (2021)
California Supreme Court holds courts can use public policy to limit or eliminate a defendant’s duty, arising from a special relationship or otherwise, to protect the plaintiff from injuries caused by a third party, but courts may not rely on public policy to create such a duty.

Stokes v. Muschinske (2019).
Court of Appeal affirms favorable judgment and holds that defense billing experts can use Medicare reimbursement rates to form their opinions on the reasonable value of medical services.

Perry v. Bakewell Hawthorne, LLC (2017)
California Supreme Court unanimously held that an expert opinion excluded from evidence for disclosure violations should also be excluded from consideration at summary judgment.

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court (2016)
California Supreme Court held that bills sent by a lawyer to a client in pending and active legal matters are protected under the attorney-client privilege.

Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation v. Goldentop Road, LLC (2016) Successfully Represented Fortune 100 company in the California Court of Appeal in a multi-million dollar dispute over commercial lease.

McClatchy v. Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass, LLP (2016)
Successfully represented major San Francisco law firm in California Court of Appeal in case addressing Doe amendments under California Code of Civil Procedure section 474.

Martin v. Inland Empire Utilities Agency (2015)
Successfully represented governmental entity in California Court of Appeal seeking disqualification of opposing counsel based on his review and use of privileged document.

Ironridge Global IV, Ltd. v. ScripsAmerica, Inc. (2015)
In multi-million dollar breach of contract case, California Court of Appeal dismissed the opposing party’s appeal under the disentitlement doctrine based on the opposing party’s multiple violations of a trial court order pending appeal.

Aghaian v. Minassian (2015)
California Court of Appeal reversed forum non conveniens ruling in $100 million real estate dispute, holding that the Iran’s legal system does not comport with American standards of due process.

Eisenhower Medical Center v. Superior Court (2014)
California Court of Appeal granted writ relief in favor of client in $500 million class action brought under the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act.

Intransit, Inc. v. Travelers Property and Cas. Co. of America(2014)
Ninth Circuit reversed judgment against insurer, finding that district court misapplied Oregon principles of policy interpretation.

Jay v. Mahaffey (2013)
California Court of Appeal affirmed denial of anti-SLAPP motion in malicious prosecution case.

Manufactured Home Comm. v. County of San Luis Obispo (2008)
Successfully represented client challenging administrative proceeding where the California Court of Appeal held that the client was denied its constitutional right to cross-examination of witnesses.


  • Boston University School of Law
    J.D., cum laude, 1993
  • University of California, Los Angeles
    B.A., 1990


  • Hon. Charles F. Eick, U.S. District Court, Central District of California (1993-1994)
  • Hon. Robert Devich (Ret.), California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division One (1991) (Extern)

Bar Admissions

  • California
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
  • United States District Courts for the Central, Southern, Northern and Eastern Districts of California

Professional Associations