12th Annual Advanced Appellate Practice Program (CA) [Two-Part Webinar] (Recorded Package and OnDemand Streaming)

What You Will Learn

This agenda is in the planning stages, please check back soon.

Testimonials

“I look forward to this program every year. The speakers are always fantastic, the topics are always interesting and useful, and the appellate specialization credit is a huge bonus. This year’s program more than lived up to my expectations.” – Tiffany J. Gates, Esq.

“Excellent program. Many MCLE programs focus on delivering cold facts, but this program stands apart because of its use of anecdotes and real‑world stories. It makes the material more engaging and helps me remember it.” – Jenna Parker, Esq.

“Pincus always has great speakers and timely topics.” – Polly Estes, Esq.

“Fantastic seminar. One of the best I’ve ever seen.” – Kym Speer, Esq.

“Well done as always. Nice selection of topics.” – Deborah Bull, Esq.

“Pincus consistently provides first-rate legal education programs on timely topics with excellent speakers. After attending its programs in multiple states for nearly two decades, I can confidently say Pincus always delivers, and I am a better attorney for having regularly followed its programs.” – Robert Little, Esq.

“Very useful information and insights, including what happens inside appellate courts, from the BEST, most knowledgeable sources.” – Jay-Allen Eisen, Esq.

“Always a great program with reliable, in depth, not surface examination of issues for advance appellate practice.” – Christie Webb, Esq.

“The AI panel was very helpful. I appreciated that it focused on practical guidance for using AI to enhance legal practice and framed the topic as part of developing professional competence, rather than taking a knee‑jerk, doom‑and‑gloom approach.” – Hyura Choi, Esq.

“Learned the latest cases and developments. Speakers were really good as usual.” – Christie Webb, Esq.

“Useful insights from an insider in the 9th Circuit. Briefs session was hugely satisfying for my inner appellate nerd. I particularly enjoyed how Justice Banke compared what she used to think was important as a practitioner vs. what she now finds important as an appellate court justice. Very helpful! I greatly appreciated Justice Streeter’s openness and honesty. I’ve seen Justice Chin speak several times, and he never disappoints! Always a pleasure to watch.” – Tiffany J. Gates, Esq.

“I often attend MCLE just to get the credits. Pincus programs are interesting, useful, have excellent handouts, and the time is used wisely.” – Christopher D. Lockwood, Esq.

“Excellent presenters and relevant subject matter, helping keep me current and sharp on crucial appellate issues.” – Glenn Danas, Esq.

“Very useful, informative program. Every speaker was excellent!” – Kevin Meek, Esq.

“Consistently the best live CLE I attend each year. Not to be missed! This isn’t just a refresher on the basics. This brings clarity to real challenges in appellate practice with the top experts in the field.” – Joshua Furman, Esq.

“As always, excellent speakers and content. Very informative with practical and useful anecdotes.” – Marisa Janine-Page, Esq.

“Excellent program; topics that don’t merely rehash the usual, but provide a deeper discussion of issues important to appellate lawyers.” – Glenn Danas, Esq.

“I have participated in this course just about every year since its inception, and it consistently meets my objectives.” – Robert Collings Little, Esq.

“A ‘must attend’ for appellate specialists, for attorneys who regularly appear in reviewing courts, and for any litigator who wishes to broaden their knowledge of appellate practice in general and hot topics on substance and procedure in appellate courts. Pincus’s program has become the definitive MCLE course on appellate practice.” – Robert Collings Little, Esq.

“The program was interesting and there were good speakers. The portion about amicus briefs was intriguing, with ideas for future cases.” – Christopher D. Lockwood, Esq.

“Unquestionably the best and most stimulating way to stay up to date on relevant appellate matters in California and federal court.” – Brian Beckwith, Esq.

“This program exceeded my expectations. The speakers were dynamic and brilliant, and the topics were incredibly helpful to my practice. I’ll be using this information for years to come… It was great!” – Tiffany J. Gates, Esq.

“I always take away important ideas and tweak my practices following a Pincus Appellate Summit.” – Leslie Ellen Shear, Esq.

“The content at this program was very useful.” – Sarah Birmingham, Esq.

“This is a great advanced seminar. Very high-level, informative presentations.” – Tom Freeman, Esq.

“This is always an excellent seminar! Great practical advice by the masters.” – Marisa Janine-Page, Esq.

“The program lived up to the description, which is high praise.” – Madeline Miller, Esq.

“One of the best CLEs every year.” – Sarah Birmingham, Esq.

“Awesome program.” – Michelle Smythe, Esq.

“Every year this program has great topics from excellent speakers with practical and useful information.” – Sarah Birmingham, Esq.

“Excellent and relevant as usual.” – Brian Beckwith, Esq.

“Good content and speakers.” – Tom Freeman, Esq.

“Great stuff.” – Abram Genser, Esq.

“Wonderful. The program was very enlightening and amazing. The tips are incredible and very refreshing and although they seemed intuitive, they truly are not.” – Francisco Javier Aldana, Esq.

“I chose this program because I’m a previous attendee and have enjoyed it.”

“Excellent! I look forward to attending other Pincus programs.” – David M. Arbogast, Esq.

“This is always my favorite program of the year. The variety of topics and the quality of the speakers provide interesting insights and excellent practical advice.” – Lori Sebransky, Esq.

“Every year, this program provides impactful feedback from active appellate justices that I incorporate into my practice. Thank you very much for organizing.” – Jenna Parker, Esq.

“All great topics.” – Richard P. Fisher, Esq.

“Excellent as always!” – Lori Sebransky, Esq.

“All presenters are great. There were a lot of good nuggets that I will use in my practice.” – Linda Conrad, Esq.

“Year in, year out this is the best MCLE seminar for experienced appellate lawyers.” – Tom Freeman, Esq.

“I appreciated the opening discussion on federal (9th Circuit) law and procedure.” – Justin R. Sarno, Esq.

“A fast-moving program – covered a lot of ground.” – Lisa Ungerer, Esq.

“A very good panel of speakers with good diversity in topics.” – Robert Mata, Esq.

“Beyond our expectations. Very useful to us. To Stephen Mayer – wow. Thank you for waking up the right mindset and strategy. Justice Banke’s perspective was on target.” – Larry Peluso, Esq.

“Second year taking this course. Great information, speakers, and lots of ideas, tips and suggestions. Thanks, I’ll be back next year!” – John Stobart, Esq.

“Broader (and better) scope than expected. Another excellent program.” – Marisa Janine-Page, Esq.

“Excellent content and very up-to-date advice (COVID changes to procedures).” – Shirley Gauvin, Esq.

“Great program as always.” – Susan Horst, Esq.

“While advanced, this was a great overview of appellate issues.” – Brian Mahler, Esq.

“Lovely and pleasant, very satisfied. Thanks.” – Nathan W. Gabbard, Esq.

“Great program, wouldn’t change anything.” – Glenn Danas, Esq.

“Much better than the average MCLE courses. It was well thought out and well-presented. I look forward to taking more Pincus courses.” – Earl L. Roberts, Esq.

“The program was wonderful, as usual. I liked that it was split up into two separate parts/days. That made it much easier to fit into my schedule. Additionally, the topics were truly ‘advanced’ and timely — particularly the discussion about presenting remote oral arguments. The whole program was great! I look forward to attending again next year. :-)” – Tiffany J. Gates, Esq.

“Speakers and handout were thorough and interesting.” – Brian C. Unitt, Esq.

“The course has been very informative and specifically addressed topics about which I have had questions in my own appellate practice.” – Linda Balciunas Cockrell, Esq.

“The program is a must for practicing appellate lawyers!” – Trinette Sachrison, Esq.

“If you only attend one live CLE a year, make sure it is the Pincus Advanced Appellate Seminar.” – Joshua R. Furman, Esq.

“Excellent programs. The presenters are top rate and it is always nice to get insight from the actual judges and justices about things happening behind the curtains.” – Jeremy Robinson, Esq.

“Excellent seminar. It’s one of the best I have attended.” – Bob Lucas, Esq.

“The state and federal court appellate practice mix was just right. Great to hear from judges and court staff about real-world issues (COVID arguments, procedures, etc.) we all are dealing with (we go to work to present our cases at the same place the court’s people do; good to hear what makes it easier).” – Harry Chamberlain, Esq.

“The topics were interesting and helpful to my practice.” – Jessica Simon, Esq.

“This is an excellent program. I would recommend it. I found the panel to be very thoughtful and engaged with the purpose of educating the audience.” – Elizabeth Rhodes, Esq.

“Great job, as usual!” – John Kinsey, Esq.

“All the speakers were good, and the material was appropriate.” – Paul A. Lax, Esq.

“Great program.” – Sarah Birmingham, Esq.

“The program lived up to my expectations. The topics were interesting, and the speakers were engaging (a particularly tough task in this virtual world). I’m looking forward to Part 2 on Thursday!” – Tiffany J. Gates, Esq.

“Excellent program and great speakers.” – (Thomas) Christopher Johns, Esq.

“Excellent program. Last three panels were especially good.” – Deborah Drooz, Esq.

“Learned some valuable things.” – Lawrence P. Hellman, Esq.

“Good choice of topics.” – Wendy Lascher, Esq.

“My personal objectives were to listen, learn, and gain new insights to improve my practice. Mission accomplished.” – Jenna E. Parker, Esq.

“Excellent coverage of COVID-19 issues.” – Douglas Everett Klein, Esq.

“Great interactive dialogue between the speakers.” – Amanda F. Benedict, Esq.

“Great to hear directly from the justices about their in-house practices; the kitchen sink – that’s a hoot!” – Harry Chamberlain, Esq.

“All were excellent!” – Stephen V. Masterson, Esq.

“I was aiming to gain insight on the appellate system and gain tips to assist my future endeavors in the court. I feel much more confident in my abilities! The handbook was very helpful and informative. I enjoyed the webinar format.” – Gina Simas, Esq.

“Every year this program has great topics from excellent speakers with practical and useful information.” – Sarah Birmingham, Esq.

“Still one of the best CLE programs.” – Joshua R. Furman, Esq.

“It is a good range of topics and excellent speakers. I have never been to a bad Pincus program.” – Christopher D. Lockwood, Esq.

“Content is relevant and current, and speakers are excellent as usual! Thanks.” – Anne Rauch, Esq.

“I thought the speakers were very engaging. It was very valuable to hear from the perspective of the appellate justices, including justices before whom I’ve argued.” – Linda Balciunas Cockrell, Esq.

“Great info that can be applied quickly to my practice.” – Robert Harrison, Esq.

“Excellent speakers… Great handouts.” – Ira Salzman, Esq.

“I hoped to have a good panel on oral argument, and another on agency appeals. These were great.” – Daniel Trump, Esq.

“Excellent program.” – Shirley A. Gauvin, Esq.

“Excellent.” – Ryan Artola, Esq.

“John Taylor did a wonderful job of explaining complex appellate issues to a non-appellate attorney, such as myself. I greatly enjoyed his presentation.” – Kevin Meek, Esq.

“The program was excellent.” – Tom Freeman, Esq.

“I learned a lot about advanced appellate practice.” – John L. Jones II, Esq.

“I thought it was all great.” – Polly Estes, Esq.

“Wonderful!” – Chris Lim, Esq.

“I thought the program was excellent.” – Ellen R. Serbin, Esq.

“The program was very good. Very thorough.” – Thomas Anthony Trapani, Esq.

“Justice Streeter is really interesting and provides great insight and information.” – Sarah Birmingham, Esq.

“What I appreciate the most from these trainings is the multiple perspectives from various justices and practicing attorneys.” – Cynthia Vargas, Esq.

“Excellent presenters and relevant subject matter, helping keep me current and sharp on crucial appellate issues.” – Glenn Danas, Esq.

“I have participated in this course just about every year since its inception, and it consistently meets my objectives.” – Robert Collings Little, Esq.

“Fantastic sophisticated advice for practitioners.”

“Excellent, as always!” – Marisa Janine-Page, Esq.

“Recognized appellate speakers. Good content and practical insights.” – David Lantzer, Esq.

“I loved it. Thank you!” – Alex Volkov, Esq.

“Excellent, informative program. Presentations from judges were especially useful, and Ben Shatz is a very good moderator.” – Ryan Wu, Esq.

“I attend lots of CLE courses – significantly more than required. This program was outstanding! Careful selection of topics and presenters. This was my first Pincus course. It will not be my last.” – Steven Finell, Esq.

“Excellent content, expertly presented, excellent program! I’m trying to resume active appellate practice after years of preoccupation with family care issues – this program was a great start!” – Bruce Finch, Esq.

“Such useful information (on the 9th Circuit). Thank you! Love all the anecdotal wisdom Wendy Lascher shares. Kent Richland had great practical experience and excellent tips. Thank you for including Justice Miller! So helpful to hear that side. Judge Klatchko is so smart and I love all the rules and guides she contributed to the presentation. Harry Chamberlain is always amazing! It’s impressive how Effie Cogan knows every detail of every appellate case. I love when she’s a panelist!” – Marisa Janine-Page, Esq.

“The best part was the inside the Ninth Circuit program. I do a lot of work in that court and found the descriptions of its operations fascinating.” – Richard L. Antognini, Esq.

“Having a ‘behind-the-scenes’ perspective on the appellate courts’ workings is very valuable. I handle 2–3 writs/appeals per month and this subject matter is useful. Very engaging speakers. The judicial perspective is highly informative.” – Sean Collins, Esq.

“Thank you. The program, panelists, and participants were excellent.” – Teresa Stinson, Esq.

“Greatly appreciated the program – it was right on the edge of what is happening today. I am coming back!” – Alex Volkov, Esq.

“Always such great insight and intel!” – Trinette Sachrison, Esq.

“Great speakers and content, Ben is a great moderator.” – Tim Kowal, Esq.

“It’s great to have presentations targeting experienced appellate lawyers. Tremendously useful.” – Tom Freeman, Esq.

“Thought-provoking, as always.” – Leslie Ellen Shear, Esq.

“This was a great program. I feel charged up for my next appellate matter and armed with many tips.” – Amanda F. Benedict, Esq.

“Great use of knowledgeable and credible presenters. Truly an excellent program; well thought out with valuable information.”

“I attended last year’s appellate conference. It was so helpful and informative that I wanted to attend this year’s conference.” – Linda N. Wisotsky, Esq.

“I attended the seminar to learn about cutting-edge appellate issues. The seminar exceeded my expectations and I learned a ton. I greatly enjoyed the seminar and look forward to attending in the future.” – Kevin Meek, Esq.

“The presentations were high quality as always.” – Brian C. Unitt, Esq.

“Surpassed my expectation. This was an excellent program.” – Bruce Finch, Esq.

“The judges are the draw, but some advocates are really strong, too — like John Taylor, Mira Hashmall, Susan Horst, Robin Meadow.” – Michael G. Colantuono, Esq.

“As usual, it was well done and provided practical information. For me, the most interesting portion was the inside view in the Ninth Circuit. It was helpful hearing from sitting judges about their views concerning briefing and oral argument.” – Christopher D. Lockwood, Esq.

“Justice Rivera was very good, detailed, and interesting. Harry Chamberlain was a very good speaker. This was a terrific panel!” – Steve Mayer, Esq.

“It was a wonderful and very informative program. The speakers were loaded with so much information that you cannot acquire without being an attendee. Great speakers!” – Blanca C. Vaughan, Esq.

“It was an informative seminar, full of practical information. Excellent program.” – John Yasuda, Esq.

“Thank you for providing practical and useful information that can actually be used in preparing for oral arguments and brief writing. The program was direct and informative and provided different perspectives from clerks, justices, and attorneys, making for a well-rounded presentation.” – Jenna Parker, Esq.

“Very good program.” – Paul Young, Esq.

“This was an excellent program. Speakers did a great job.” – Christopher Johns, Esq.

“Truly useful, with Wendy’s segment as the most valuable.” – Leslie Ellen Shear, Esq.

“Very satisfied with the program.” – Dennis Beaty, Esq.

“Always a great program every year. Excellent content. For the online version, one of the most functional and user-friendly programs I have attended.” – Sarah Birmingham, Esq.

“Excellent and comprehensive, as usual.” – Brian Beckwith, Esq.

“I always learn something from every panel, and I always hear things that I continue to mull over.” – Leslie Ellen Shear, Esq.

“As always, excellent presenters with practical and thoughtful instruction.” – Sarah J. Birmingham, Esq.

“Always valuable. I appreciate the collaboration and expertise of the panelists.” – Trinette Sachrison, Esq.

“As always, there was a lot of high-quality discussion of advanced material.” – Brian C. Unitt, Esq.

“Very knowledgeable.” – Robert Harrison, Esq.

“Today’s topics were particularly useful.” – Leslie Ellen Shear, Esq.

“Great content as usual!” – Anne Rauch, Esq.

“Overall, thought the program was well done and covered a lot of helpful information. The first panel was very helpful and informative. Would like to see more panels like that one, which provide different perspectives on how to handle certain aspects of appellate practice and briefing.”

“Pincus’ excellent materials are worth their weight in gold.”

“There was great discussion about the topics, for the most part, and I left today having learned something.”

“Appreciated the insights for practice observations.”

“Great information and resources.”

“I really liked to hear information outside of the statutory language. It was great to hear their routines or best practices and advice from the bench.”

“Great subject matter and topics within.”

“It was great to hear insight from judicial officers.”

“I was very happy to get the detailed background on appeal bonds. Some good details there.”

“Standard of review and AI were excellent and eye-opening.”

“The information provided regarding AI was extremely enlightening.”

“Every Pincus program I attend, I always learn something new and useful.”

“Great substance, focus on practical issues that might not be covered in trials or legal research.”

“Hon. Michael J. Raphael was clear and insightful.”

“Benjamin G. Shatz was solid, entertaining, and very engaged.”

“I have listened to all of these programs and they are always extremely informative and engaging.”

“This seminar had the high-quality content I have come to expect.”

“The speakers were great and the content was well-developed. Particularly enjoyed the AI segment.”

“Excellent program. Very helpful for the experienced appellate practitioner. I always take something useful away from these programs.”

“Specialized MCLE credit for appellate specialists is a MUST… these Pincus programs are the best anywhere.”

“I am an appellate lawyer with more than 30 years of experience and it is hard to find MCLE programs in this practice area that are sophisticated enough to be informative.”

“Appellate practice is a useful skill and I was impressed by the number and quality of justices and judges on the panels.”

“These advanced appellate presentations are consistently well-run and the presenters are masters at clear and interesting communication.”

“The program is a must to keep my appellate specialist designation. It was interesting to get insights into the Court of Appeal processes, including concurring and dissenting opinions.”

“I like that the substance is what was advertised.”

“Excellent speakers and directed to sophisticated audience. Bravo.”

“Good speakers, useful information.”

“This is the second time I have attended one of the Advanced Appellate Practice programs and they have varied between comprehensive of the appellate process (first) to selective in topics (today’s). Both were interesting and informative. I do appreciate hearing from a variety of speakers on the same topic, not just within one year’s program but from year to year. I find the entirety of the program informative and valuable.

Several of the speakers are dynamic and some are even entertaining and enlightening with their humor. I appreciate a variety in speakers between years. I was pleased that you were able to have retired CJ Cantil-Sakauye join the discussion this year. Her perspective and insight are very helpful.”

“Really great program. I had a number of questions going in that were answered before I even had to ask them.”

“An intense, informative day. One of the few programs that lives up to its name of being ‘advanced.’”

“Terrific and topical material on generative AI and appellate practice, advanced oral argument and briefing, nuts and bolts of Ninth Circuit practice, making and opposing claims for attorney fees in trial and appellate courts.”

“The morning session and AI in the afternoon were worthwhile and useful.”

“Excellent as usual.”

“I really enjoyed the discussion of oral arguments and how to present and respond to questions.”

“Overall, the program was very informative.”

“It moved quickly and it’s great to have advanced topics.”

“Very good.”

“Awesome program.”

“This program was fabulous! Such a helpful and comprehensive update on our practice with all that has changed since the pandemic and with AI and everything. Truly interesting, helpful, and relevant. Thank you!!”

“Always a good program. Written materials are useful, too – you can’t always say that about CLE programs.”

“This was very informative and interesting.”

“Good program!”

“Excellent program and speakers.”

“One of my favorite programs. I still listen to old recordings.”

“Covered the nuances of appellate practice that would be expected in an advanced seminar.”

“As always, I learned something new that is likely (or at least conceivably) to be useful in practice.”

“Great, and perfect moderation.”

“Very knowledgeable presenters.”

“The speakers were very knowledgeable. It included advanced topics of discussion.”

“I have an upcoming argument in the Court of Appeal – this seminar gave me useful information and tips which will assist me in preparation.”

“Speakers were excellent, content was relevant, and materials will be useful in practice.”

“I felt like I learned a lot, especially from the judges’ perspective and from more experienced attorneys who have been doing this longer than I have.”

“Another great program – you never disappoint.”

“As always, a worthwhile seminar and glad I could attend remotely. Very much looking forward to Part II.”

“I found the first part on the collateral order doctrine the most useful and informative. The appellate writ section was most useful for the notion that asking for a suggestive Palma order should be considered for writs in general. The Supreme Court section was useful for the grant-and-hold discussion.”

“Having Justice Groban on to explain the process before the Supreme Court was immensely informative.”

“Excellent. A++.”

“It was the best program that I have ever attended. My only concern is that we need more frequent presentations on these issues.”

“Extremely knowledgeable speakers on very practical and useful topics.”

“It was engaging and informative.”

“I thought it was very specific rather than a general overview of appellate practice or basics.”

“Lots of good detail.”

“The content of the materials, very well presented, together with the highly respected quality of the presenters and the issues and topics (especially the AI aspects of the program). The AI segment of the program was an eye-opener for me. The other material emphasized topics and issues that were also helpful for me.”

“Well organized, timely information.”

“Topics are practical and needed!”

“Excellent program.”

“Great to hear about recent changes. Justice Miller had thoughtful comments. Justice Grimes’ perspective was helpful.”

“As usual, addresses the ‘advanced’ issues facing appellate attorneys. And as always, knowledgeable presenters.”

“Ben Shatz was an absolutely fantastic moderator. The first two panels also were fantastic – so interesting, organized, and the content was unique, useful, and delivered efficiently.”

“Having appellate court justices on the panels (both state and federal) has been extremely illuminating this year.”

“Very informative. Definitely one of the better or best CLE I have attended.”

“I am an appellate specialist, and this program provides updates on changes in appellate procedures as well as helpful tips on appellate practice.”

“The speakers are always dynamic — I particularly enjoyed the mix of practitioners and judges/justices this year — and the topics are always helpful to my practice. This year was no exception.”

“This is precisely the kind of extra training I need, especially with the handouts. I have confidence that this will be my first step in research when these issues come across my desk because I will know exactly what the judges are looking for.”

“Highly professional and substantive presentation.”

“Enjoyed some of the more arcane subjects. Excellent review of the more familiar subjects.”

“Enjoyed the program. Enjoyed Judge Klatchko’s discussion of standards of review. Great program – particularly on the Supreme Court and standards of review.”

“I was very impressed with the discussion on statutory interpretation.” – John L. Jones II, Esq.

“I’m glad I came and definitely glad I joined the networking lunch.” – Rochelle Wilcox, Esq.

“Excellent and different than ‘the usual.’ Very innovative choice of subjects of importance to appellate specialists.”

“I love Pincus-produced lectures and seminars. Excellent appellate information, very thorough handouts and materials.”

“I learned a lot, and enjoyed the variety of topics discussed. I also appreciated hearing from speakers with ‘boots on the ground’ perspective about the various technical issues the court has seen arise now that most proceedings are remote.”

“Excellent and well-put-together seminar.”

“As usual, all of the speakers were excellent in both knowledge and presentation. I was also impressed with your staff. My secretary inadvertently signed me up for a recording rather than attending live. That was quickly and efficiently remedied.”

“I am an appellate specialist, and this program provides updates on changes in appellate procedures as well as helpful tips on appellate practice.”

“Excellent comprehensive program.”

“I’ve been to several of these seminars over the years and I’ve generally enjoyed them.”

“Excellent content and delivery; very practical information and insight.”

“I really enjoyed the conversational feel between the speakers.”

“Year in and year out this is the most useful and interesting of the many CLE seminars I’ve attended.”

“Excellent information all around. The insight from Justice Segal about his division’s and his personal decision-making process and considerations was extremely useful.”

“Good, vigorous discussion.”

“Excellent presentations.”

“The program is great and incredibly informative.”

“Great seminar! So much great, practical information I can use.”

“This program was very helpful.” – Ellen R. Serbin, Esq.

“Great program, very good content.”

“Overall, great program. The second day’s program provided engaging discussions and helpful information on the advanced appellate practice issues I hoped would be covered when I signed up.”

“Day 2 was fantastic. So much good information and insights.”

“Excellent program – good choice of topics and speakers.”

“Faith Pincus always puts on a great program. I like the recordings on CD. I listen to them in the car.”

“Excellent program and great speakers.”

“Greg Wolff was worth the price of admission on his own.”

“I like the speakers and how they each bring a different perspective. It helps when they all discuss their own opinion on a topic to hear different takes.”

“Excellent program – I wouldn’t change anything.”

“Learned a lot and will definitely recommend.”

“Good speakers, good topics, right length. Breaking it across two days is great for video conferences.”

“Liked the diversity of opinion with the other panelists.”

“Excellent program!”

“Great mix of topics!”

“Excellent program. Great information and insight for high-level practicing appellate attorneys.”

“Fantastic sophisticated advice for practitioners.”

“Appreciated the practical and timely remote appearance advice.”

“Excellent program. I’ve just started appellate work and wanted to learn more. This program was quite good. Thank you!”

“Good to hear tips for video arguments and the discussion with Justice Groban was enlightening.”

“I enjoyed the program, particularly the variety of speakers and mix of discussion about both technical and legally substantive issues.”

“Excellent program. Very practical stuff.”

“I enjoyed the practical tips and suggestions on brief writing.”

“I gained resources that will be extremely helpful regarding timing of motions.”

“Excellent, informative, enjoyable – all of the speakers did a great job.”

“Excellent program.”

“I especially like having some justices and some practitioners and the interaction among them.”

“Good discussion and insight.”

“It’s informative and useful for my practice.”

“It was very good, particularly the oral argument section.”

“As usual, very informative and excellent panelists.”

“As always, an excellent program with important information provided by excellent panelists.”

“Excellent!”

“Great, as always. Thank you very much for doing this, Faith, and your team.”

“Good, clean presentation with useful discussion feel as opposed to lecturing on and on.”

“For me, the discussion by Colantuono, Chamberlain, and Ming was most interesting.”

“Found issues related to trial court level and what might become appellate issues as a result very interesting and helpful. Also great advice on how to handle a writ when documents/transcripts are missing was excellent.”

“Good and thorough program.”

“Good, solid program.”

“I thought it was a great overview of all the different topics. The resource material looks to be very thorough and will be a good reference.”

“Great content, very informative.”

“Very practical and would definitely attend again and recommend to others.”

“Great presentations overall. I have been practicing civil litigation for one year and had many ‘aha!’ moments.”

“Great program – particularly on the Supreme Court and standards of review.”

“I am coming back!”

“Great seminar. Simply an excellent program, good choice of topics and the speakers were great.”

“I thought it was really good. The speakers were well prepared and not rambling, and the presentations were on point.”

“Great seminar.”

“I really appreciated the real-world portions of the program.”

“I am a practicing appellate attorney and I heard good things about this seminar. All the speakers were very knowledgeable and presented well and kept my interest – and the materials in the appendix were very useful.”

“I appreciate the program’s practical advice on navigating online oral argument.”

“The justices are incredibly valuable. Thanks to them for participating.”

“I enjoyed hearing thoughts from the judges and other attorneys on each topic presented.”

“I liked hearing from the judges – it’s always interesting to hear their points of view.”

“It was great to hear direct practice advice and pointers from experienced lawyers and judges. I also thought the deposition and summary judgment sections were very helpful.”

“It’s always helpful to have judges and attorneys who have worked at an appellate court speak at programs like this, as it’s helpful to have the view from the inside.”

“Excellent program.”

“I love the format and the pace!”

“I loved it.”

“Anna-Rose Mathieson was very helpful and interesting!”

“I really enjoyed the practical sections regarding brief writing and virtual oral arguments.”

“Great program and location. The lunch itself was great, as was the opportunity to network.”

“I thoroughly enjoyed the discussion during ethics regarding plagiarism and ghostwriting. I think it was the most interesting conversation all day.”

“I was happy to have the speakers answer questions quickly, and to provide many secondary resources to look for after the webinar.”

“Informative, but more specific to the speakers – they are good at speaking and take into consideration the listener and things that might be annoying on a webinar.”

“It was a nice rundown of key components of litigation.”

“I liked the mix of appellate practitioners and judges.”

“It was great, super informative. I really appreciated all of the individual insight.”

“Mr. Colantuono and Judge Klatchko were very good and helpful.”

“It was very informative. I especially enjoyed the sections on oral argument.”

“Really great program. Wonderful insights into thinking of judges and practitioners.”

“Recommended by colleagues. Really great program. Wonderful insights into thinking of judges and practitioners.”

“Justice Miller was delightful. Justice Grimes and John Taylor were effective. Judge Klatchko was an utterly delightful teacher.”

“Speakers were excellent.”

“Justice Streeter was great! Watt and Chamberlain were very good.”

“Really good, varied program.”

“Nice job. The program was easy to follow. I much appreciated receiving the materials in advance. I printed them out and made notes on them.”

“Organization and administration were excellent and very efficient.”

“Panelists were all terrific – one of the best MCLE classes I have taken!”

“Program was excellent – good speakers.”

“So far it has been great! Especially getting the hard copy and handout. When it comes up in practice, I can go back and listen and read about the specific area.”

“Really great presenters.”

“The program was very informative. I learned something new.”

“Terrific, as always.”

“Received a lot of good, practical information and advice regarding handling of appeals and appellate issues.”

“The first program with the three justices regarding virtual oral argument was really good, I thought. The last section with Justice Groban was interesting to get an insider view on how the Cal. Supreme Court operates behind the scenes.”

“Simply an excellent program, good choice of topics and the speakers were great.”

“Speakers are great.”

“Speakers seemed knowledgeable, and it was organized well.”

“The nuts and bolts for arguing before the Court of Appeal was helpful, as I’m preparing for my first argument.”

“The program is always very valuable and insightful, as appellate practitioners tend to encounter tricky, interesting, and challenging issues that are excellent topics for discussion with colleagues and peers.”

“Stephen Mayer was very engaging. Justice Chin gave invaluable insight. Very engaging.”

“Substantive and consistent with the billing.”

“Very informative with practical and useful anecdotes.”

“Terrific!”

“The ‘insider’ information was excellent. The program was also well organized. It was informative.”

“Very informative and it was great to hear from various members of the legal community.”

“The 3-hour, remote format made it more convenient to attend.”

“This was an excellent program. All speakers did a great job!”

“The Justice Grimes/Segal part was great.”

“Excellent panels.”

“Great discussions today on oral argument and PIs.”

“Very happy with the program.”

“Excellent as usual.”

“Excellent as always.”

“Great speakers and content.”

“Great expertise and balanced panels.”

“The discussion regarding remote versus in-person appearances for oral argument was excellent.”

“Informative. I found the preliminary injunction section helpful.”

“Great panel today!”

“Great insights; so appreciated.”

“The program was excellent.”

“Very practical and very helpful.”

“The oral arguments by video were useful; the lighting/audio/image information was useful.”

“Timely. The substance of the final segment on forms of Supreme Court relief other than grant of review was the most interesting part of the program for me.”

“Very organized. Thank you!”

“Thought the content was very good and topical.”

“Video argument sessions were great.”

“The program was very informative, and I definitely learned something new.”

“Very high quality – appreciate the thoughtfulness of speakers.”

“Today’s program was good as well. Interesting discussions about brief writing and statutory construction, among other things.”

“Thoughtful, informative, and helpful.”

“Very current and useful information.”

“Was an excellent presentation, especially remotely.”

“I thought it was all very helpful.”

“Very good materials.”

“Wonderful speakers, and content was extremely relevant and helpful to my practice.”

“Very much enjoyed the program.”

“The speakers are fabulous.”

“Very informative program filled with practical and helpful information.”

“I felt that the topics and the issues were very helpful and focused. I like the trend to include federal appellate content, and I encourage this to continue.”

“Very informative.”

“All the speakers were great and provided a lot of insight on their respective presentation.”

“Wonderful appellate presentations; insightful and helpful for the daily practitioner.”

“I enjoy hearing from all the appellate justices you have and would enjoy the opportunity to hear from new ones as well.”

“It was nice to see judges from various courts.”

“Excellent.”

“I liked the timeliness and variety of topics from knowledgeable and prepared speakers.”

“Well-organized, good speakers.”

“Excellent speakers and interesting topics.”

“Excellent panelists and content.”

“Another fabulous program. Loved hearing from Justice Chin!”

“Very helpful and an impressive group of speakers.”

“Informative and easy to listen to.”

“Very interesting discussion on remote oral argument procedures especially. Lots of good tips.”

“Always fabulous!”

“Very interesting and informative, as always.”

“All the speakers were so engaging. Content was great.”

“Very good program. I really liked all the advice the judges and attorneys gave.”

“Wonderful program.”

Faculty

Hon. Daniel H. Bromberg
Associate Justice
California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District

Daniel H. Bromberg was appointed to the Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District, by Governor Gavin Newsom in January 2023. 

From 2019 to 2021, Justice Bromberg served as a Deputy Secretary for Legal Affairs in the Governor’s Office, where he supervised lawyers in the California Environmental Protection Agency, Natural Resource Agency, Department of Transportation, and Department of Food and Agriculture. During this period, Justice Bromberg also supervised litigation concerning, among other things, the border wall and COVID-19 restrictions. 

Both before and after serving in the Governor’s Office, Justice Bromberg was in private practice. He began his career as an associate at Cahill Gordon & Reindel in New York, working primarily on First Amendment matters. He subsequently moved to JonesDay in Washington, D.C., where he became a partner in the appellate practice. In 2005, he moved to California to join Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, where he helped found the appellate practice group and remained until joining the Governor’s Office. After leaving the Governor’s Office, Justice Bromberg joined Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman in San Francisco as the head of the firm’s appellate practice. 

Mr. Bromberg graduated summa cum laude with a B.A. in history from Yale University and magna cum laude with a J.D. from Harvard Law School, where he was a member of the Law Review. He clerked for the Honorable Louis F. Oberdorfer on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Circuit and then for the Honorable A. Raymond Randolph on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. 

Justice Bromberg has taught continuing legal education classes on writing and appellate practice. In addition, in 2021 and 2022, he was a senior research fellow at the California Constitution Center at the Berkeley School of Law. During the same period he was a senior appellate practice fellow in the Center for Litigation and the Courts at UC College of the Law, San Francisco and the founding director of the California Appellate Advocacy Project. 

---

Hon. Martin N. Buchanan
Associate Justice
California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division One

Justice Martin N. Buchanan was nominated to the Court of Appeal by Governor Gavin Newsom and confirmed in May 2022. Before his appointment, Justice Buchanan was an appellate lawyer for nearly 35 years. He litigated approximately 400 appeals and writs in state and federal courts, mostly as a sole practitioner. Justice Buchanan also worked as a partner at a civil appellate firm, a research attorney at the Court of Appeal, a staff attorney at Appellate Defenders, Inc., and a law clerk in federal district court.

Justice Buchanan is married with two adult children. He received his law degree from Harvard University in 1986 and his bachelor’s degree from Brown University in 1983.

---

Hon. Allison M. Danner
Associate Justice
California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District

Allison Marston Danner was appointed as an Associate Justice of the California Court of Appeal, Sixth District, by Governor Brown in July 2018. Prior to her elevation to the Court of Appeal, she served as a judge on the Santa Clara County Superior Court for six years.

Justice Danner worked as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Northern District of California from July 2007 to June 2012, prosecuting a wide variety of criminal cases, including wire fraud, drug conspiracies, and mortgage fraud. From 2009 to 2010, Justice Danner was an Attorney-Adviser in the Office of Legal Counsel at the United States Department of Justice in Washington, D.C.

From 2001-2007, Justice Danner taught as a law professor at Vanderbilt University Law School, where she taught courses in criminal law, public international law, and international criminal law. In that role, she published articles in the Stanford Law Review, the California Law Review, and the Virginia Law Review, among other publications. Justice Danner has served as a visiting professor at Harvard Law School and U.C.L.A. Law School and has as an adjunct professor at Stanford Law School.

Justice Danner graduated magna cum laude with honors in history from Williams College. She received her J.D. from Stanford Law School, where she also served as an editor on the Stanford Law Review and the Stanford Journal of International Law.

Following her graduation from Stanford Law School, Justice Danner worked as a law clerk for Judge John T. Noonan, Jr., on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and then as a law clerk for Justice John Paul Stevens on the United States Supreme Court.

---

Hon. Brian M. Hoffstadt
Presiding Justice
California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five

Justice Hoffstadt has served on the Court of Appeal since August 2014. He served as an Associate Justice in Division Two for ten years, and began serving as the Presiding Justice of Division Five in 2024.

Justice Hoffstadt is a third-generation Southern Californian. He grew up in the eastern San Gabriel Valley, and attended public schools from kindergarten through law school. In 1992, he graduated from Cal Poly Pomona with a degree in business administration. Three years later, he graduated first in his class from UCLA School of Law.

Following law school, Justice Hoffstadt spent two years as a law clerk—first for the late Ninth Circuit Judge Cynthia Holcomb Hall, and then for the late Associate Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. For the next three years, he held legal policy posts at the Federal Communications Commission and the U.S. Justice Department’s Office of Policy Development, both in Washington, D.C.

Justice Hoffstadt returned to Los Angeles, and joined the U.S. Attorney’s Office as a criminal prosecutor. He spent the next six years investigating, charging, and trying criminal cases involving everything from white-collar fraud and international extortion to computer hacking and trademark infringement. He also served in the Criminal Appeals section, where he regularly briefed and argued appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

He then entered private practice as a partner at Jones Day. For the next three and a half years, he helped run the Issues & Appeals practice group in the law firm’s Los Angeles office. In that capacity, he briefed and argued complex trial court motions in civil cases, and briefed and argued civil appeals and writs before the California and federal appellate courts.

His judicial nominations have come from Governors of both major political parties.  He was appointed to the Los Angeles Superior Court in 2010 by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and then spent the next four years presiding over criminal and civil calendars, including 50 trials. He was appointed to Division Two by Governor Jerry Brown, and appointed as the Presiding Justice of Division Five by Governor Gavin Newsom.

Justice Hoffstadt has devoted many years to teaching. He has taught as an adjunct professor at USC Gould School of Law, Loyola Law School, and The George Washington University Law School. He currently teaches Evidence at USC Gould School of Law. He has also taught judicial education courses all over the State of California on evidence, habeas corpus, domestic violence law, arbitration, civil jury instructions and verdicts, and criminal law. He has been a faculty member of the Judicial College since 2012. He chaired the 2017 Appellate Judges Education Institute Summit, and served on its Board of Directors and on the Executive Committee of the Appellate Judges Conference of the American Bar Association’s Judicial Division. He chaired the 2023 Appellate Justices Institute for California appellate judges. 

Justice Hoffstadt has also written extensively. He has authored or co-authored two books:  California Criminal Discovery(5th ed. 2015, 6th ed. 2020, 7th ed. forthcoming), and Evidence Law:  Practice, Problems, and Policy (1st ed. 2023) (co-authored with Professor Laurie Levenson). He has written nearly 100 columns for the Daily Journal.  He has published articles in the UCLA Law Review, Duke Law Journal, Texas Law Review, Northwestern University Law Review, and Southern California Law Review. He was elected to the American Law Institute in 2018, and serves as an Advisor on the Restatement (Third) of the Law of Torts: Defamation and Privacy.

---

Hon. Douglas P. Miller
Justice
California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two

Justice Miller was born in Whittier, California, and grew up in Glendora, California.  He attended Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah and graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics in 1975.  Justice Miller was awarded his Juris Doctor in 1978 from Pepperdine University School of Law.  He practiced law at the Law Offices of Thomas T. Anderson in Indio, California, from 1978 through 1995.

In 1995 Justice Miller was appointed to the Riverside Superior Court by Governor Pete Wilson.  His first year he was assigned criminal trials but the remainder of his time with the superior court was spent in primarily civil trials.  He served as the Presiding Judge in the Riverside County Superior Court from January1, 2003, through December 31, 2004.  In 2006 Justice Miller was voted Trial Judge of the Year by the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA), Inland County.  In June of 2006 Justice Miller was appointed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division Two, by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Justice Miller has served on many state and local committees including the California Judges Association.  He is currently serving on the Judicial Council, as Chair of the Executive and Planning Committee; the Commission on the Future of California’s Court System; Chair of the Commission for Impartial Courts’ Task Force on Judicial Candidate Campaign Conduct; the Commission on Access to Justice; Chair of the of the California Court Case Management System Justice Partner Advisory Committee; and Vice Chair of the Supreme Court Committee on Judicial Ethics Opinions. 

Justice Miller is also active in many local programs including the Boys & Girls Club, of which he is currently the President and also on the National Area Council Committee; and he is a founding member of the Warren E. Slaughter American Inn of Court.  In his spare time, Justice Miller enjoys fly-fishing, tennis and hiking.

 

---

Hon. Michael J. Raphael
Associate Justice
California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two

Justice Raphael is the fourth generation of his family to live in Southern California, though he is the first lawyer or judge.  Justice Raphael graduated in 1990 from Rice University and in 1993 from Yale Law School, where he was a senior editor of the Yale Law Journal and an editor of the Yale Journal of Law & Policy.

Justice Raphael began his legal career as a law clerk for the Honorable Nathaniel R. Jones of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.  Justice Raphael then practiced as a trial and appellate litigator in the Washington D.C. office of a national law firm.

Justice Raphael next worked as an investigative counsel for the Government Reform Committee of the United States House of Representatives, handling the investigation of campaign fundraising that arose from the 1996 Presidential election.  During that time, Justice Raphael also taught writing and advocacy courses as an adjunct professor at the George Washington University School of Law.

In 1999, Justice Raphael returned to the Los Angeles area and spent over twelve years as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Central District of California, prosecuting over 60 federal felony cases in trial court.  Justice Raphael also was appointed as special counsel in the Northern District of California (San Francisco) and successfully investigated and prosecuted the illegal leak of grand jury testimony provided by Barry Bonds and other athletes in the course of a government investigation of steroids in sports.

As an AUSA, Justice Raphael served as chief of the Criminal Appeals Section from 2007 to 2012 after serving as deputy chief from 2005 to 2007.  As chief, Justice Raphael oversaw an annual appellate docket of roughly 300 briefs and 100 oral arguments in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  Justice Raphael personally argued 41 cases in Ninth Circuit on behalf of the United States, including three en banc cases presented to an 11-judge panel.  Justice Raphael co-taught Advanced Appellate Advocacy at the Gould School of Law at the University of California in 2005 and 2006; he also co-taught a seminar in criminal sentencing in 2008.  Justice Raphael lectured frequently on appellate brief writing and oral argument while an attorney.

In 2012, Justice Raphael became a Judge on the Los Angeles Superior Court upon his appointment by Governor Jerry Brown.   On that court, Justice Raphael initially handled assignments that included small claims, limited civil, unlawful detainer, and criminal misdemeanors.  He then served in the downtown civil “law and motion” courts that handled pretrial cases for the entire county in limited civil and personal injury cases.  For Justice Raphael’s last three years on the trial bench, he was assigned to a downtown civil independent calendar court, with a docket of a wide variety of civil cases.  While on the trial court, Justice Raphael was twice appointed to serve as a pro tem Justice in Division Five of the Second District Court of Appeal.

In 2018, Governor Brown nominated Justice Raphael to serve as an Associate Justice on the Court of Appeal, and he was unanimously confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments, after receiving an “exceptionally well qualified” rating from the Judicial Nominees Evaluation Commission.

While on the trial and appellate bench, Justice Raphael has authored several dozen articles in legal publications, has taught several judicial education courses, and has spoken frequently at legal education events for attorneys.

---

Hon. Maria P. Rivera (Ret.)
Retired Justice. Mediator | Arbitrator | Appellate Consultant
ADR Services, Inc.

Hon. Maria Rivera (Ret.) joined ADR Services, Inc. in 2018 after spending over two decades on the Courts, where she earned a reputation for being a highly accomplished, intelligent, and fair jurist.

Justice Rivera attended law school as a scholarship student, and spent her summers in work-study programs at the San Francisco Neighborhood Legal Assistance Foundation (now Bay Area Legal Aid). She also completed an externship with California Supreme Court Justice Raymond Sullivan. After graduating first in her class, she went on to work at Morrison & Foerster for three years to develop commercial litigation experience. Thereafter, she worked in the Consumer Fraud Division of the District Attorney’s office and in the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s office in San Francisco before returning to private practice. Ultimately, she became a partner, and later of counsel at McCutchen Doyle Brown & Enersen.

Inspired by her dedication to community service and commitment to improving access to justice, Justice Rivera ran for and was elected to an open seat on the Contra Costa County Superior Court in 1996. As a Judge, Justice Rivera held assignments in the General Trial Department, Family Law, and the Civil Fast Track Division, where she adjudicated hundreds of matters in law and motion, presented by demurrer, motions to dismiss, motions to strike, Anti-SLAPP motions, and scores of motions for summary judgment and summary adjudication. She was appointed to the California Court of Appeal in 2002.

As a recipient of numerous awards and accolades commemorating her staunch dedication and commitment to improving access to justice for all, Justice Rivera has been recognized throughout her legal career for her unwavering support of legal services throughout California. In addition to her long-standing devotion to serving the community, Justice Rivera enjoys a reputation for having a strong legal mind and for actively settling her cases as a trial judge. She is known to be a fair jurist who is well-versed in the law and has an exceptional depth and breadth of legal expertise.

---

Hon. David M. Rubin
Associate Justice
California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division One

Governor Gavin Newsom appointed Justice David M. Rubin to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division One on March 30, 2023. The Commission on Judicial Appointments unanimously confirmed him on June 23, 2023. Before his appointment to the Court of Appeal, Justice Rubin served for almost 17 years on the San Diego Superior Court. There he served in the criminal, family, and civil divisions. He also spent the last three years prior to appointment on the court’s Appellate Division.

Justice David M. Rubin grew up in Albany, California. He graduated with Bachelor of Arts degrees from the University of California, Berkeley in 1982. In 1986, Justice Rubin graduated from the University of San Francisco School of Law where he also served on the law review. Following law school, Justice Rubin moved to San Diego to work in the Office of the San Diego County District Attorney. He received the Prosecutor of the Year Award from that office in 2006. In January 2007, Judge Rubin joined the Superior Court bench in San Diego.

Justice Rubin sat on the California Judges Association board of directors from 2009-2012. He served as the organization’s president from 2011-12. In 2013, Justice Rubin joined the Judicial Council of California as a voting member. There he chaired the Litigation Management Committee, the Judicial Branch Budget Committee, and the Real Estate Policy Sub-committee of the Executive and Planning committee.

---

Hon. Kira L. Klatchko (Ret.)
Retired Judge, Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law
JAMS

Hon. Kira L. Klatchko (Ret.) is a retired California Superior Court judge and serves as a neutral with JAMS. She has conducted hundreds of mediations and settlement conferences in civil, probate, family and appellate matters, bringing extensive judicial and appellate experience and a practical, court-informed approach to dispute resolution.

Judge Klatchko served nine years on the Superior Court of California, Riverside County. For seven years, she presided over an unlimited civil department, managing thousands of cases from inception through resolution and developing deep experience in business, real estate, land use, construction, contract, employment, catastrophic personal injury, professional negligence, civil rights, insurance, trust, government and complex matters. She also sat for two years in an independent family law department, handling marital dissolution, custody and support, asset division, premarital and postmarital agreement, domestic partnership, adoption, move‑away and international custody, and domestic violence matters.

Judge Klatchko twice served as a justice pro tempore on the California Court of Appeal, Second District, where she reviewed appellate briefs and writ petitions and drafted opinions in civil, criminal, family, juvenile and complex matters.

Before taking the bench, Judge Klatchko was a certified civil appellate law specialist and appellate practice leader, founding and chairing an appellate practice group at a California firm and later serving as partner and vice chair of a national appellate practice. She handled and oversaw appellate matters in California and federal courts, including the Ninth Circuit, and U.S. Supreme Court, among others, and is co-editor of a leading California appellate treatise. She has written and taught extensively on civil procedure and appellate law, including as a senior research fellow at UC Berkely Law’s California Constitution Center.

Judge Klatchko is known for her preparation, procedural expertise, and thoughtful, efficient approach to dispute resolution.

---

Michael G. Colantuono, Esq.
Partner, Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law
Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, PC

Michael G. Colantuono is a shareholder in Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, a municipal law firm with offices in Pasadena and Grass Valley. Chief Justice Ronald M. George presented him with the 2010 Public Lawyer of the Year award on behalf of the California State Bar Association. The Los Angeles Daily Journal named him one of “California’s Top Municipal Lawyers” every year since its list began in 2011. The Supreme Court appointed him the first Chair of the Board of Trustees of the State Bar of California; he was previously President of the Bar. The State Bar has certified him as an Appellate Specialist and he is a member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers, a prestigious association of fewer than 100 of California’s most distinguished appellate advocates.

Michael is one of California’s leading experts on municipal revenues and has appeared in all six Courts of Appeal in California. In addition, he has argued nine public finance cases in the California Supreme Court since 2004 and briefed two others.

Michael is City Attorney of Auburn and Grass Valley and general counsel of a number of LAFCOs and special districts and previously served six other cities and many special districts. He serves as special counsel to counties, cities and special districts around California.

Michael served as President of the City Attorneys Department of the League of California Cities in 2003–2004 and established its first Ethics Committee.

He served on the Commission on Local Governance in the 21st Century, the recommendations of which led to substantial revisions of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act. Michael is General Counsel of the Calaveras and San Diego LAFCOs and serves as outside counsel to several other LAFCOs.

Michael graduated magna cum laude from Harvard College with a degree in Government and received his law degree from the Boalt Hall School of Law of the University of California at Berkeley.

He frequently posts comments on local government and municipal finance topics to Twitter ( @MColantuono ) and LinkedIn ( Michael Colantuono ).

---

Victoria E. Fuller, Esq.
Partner, Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law
Niddrie Addams Fuller Singh LLP

Victoria is certified as a specialist in appellate law by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization – a distinction earned by only 1% of her California peers. She handles appeals and writs in state and federal courts in a wide range of practice areas, including:

• Business disputes. Victoria represents large and small businesses in appeals concerning issues ranging from contract interpretation to the anti-SLAPP statute. (See, e.g., Severin Mobile Towing Inc. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (2021) 65 Cal.App.5th 292 [summary judgment reversed in a case clarifying the laws governing banks handling fraudulent deposits].) 

• Public entity laws. Having represented many public entities, Victoria has substantial experience with the Government Tort Claims Act, theories of liability in various contexts, and statutory and other immunities. 

• Employment litigation. Victoria has represented both employers and employees. She has extensive experience with issues pertaining to wrongful termination, harassment, retaliation, and workers’ compensation exclusivity. 

• Personal injury cases. Victoria has represented plaintiffs in contexts ranging from elder abuse lawsuits to coordinated fire cases. She also represents individual and entity defendants, including a nationwide coffee company in an appeal clarifying the law of causation. (Shih v. Starbucks Corporation (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 1063.) 

• Family law matters. Victoria’s case load nearly always includes multiple family law appeals, raising issues ranging from the proper characterization and division of property to undue influence committed by a spouse, enforceability of pre-and postnuptial agreements, support and custody, and DVTRO proceedings.

Victoria currently serves on the Executive Committee of the San Diego Appellate Inn of Court, a group of judges and lawyers organized to promote excellence in appellate advocacy. She previously chaired the Appellate Practice Section of the San Diego County Bar Association.

---

Jeffrey Gurrola, Esq.
Partner
Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP

GMSR partner Jeff Gurrola is a dedicated appellate lawyer who thrives on providing efficient, excellent legal analysis in high-pressure appeals and fast-paced writ proceedings. Having worked previously both as a trial litigator and as an in-house litigation attorney, Jeff has a deep understanding of the considerations his clients and their trial counsel face when considering and pursuing an appeal or writ petition.

Like his colleagues at GMSR, Jeff specializes in appeals but is a subject-matter generalist. He handles civil appeals and writ petitions in a wide spectrum of business and public entity disputes and cases involving tort law, contract law, family law, and consumer law, to name just a few. Jeff regularly briefs and argues appeals in both California and federal appellate courts. He also consults with trial attorneys before, during, and after trial to advise on key legal issues, assist in drafting dispositive post-trial motions, and help prepare the attorneys and clients to pursue or defend against any subsequent appeal.

In addition to serving his clients’ needs, Jeff assists GMSR partner Laurie Hepler in her role as Contributing Editor of Eisenberg, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Appeals and Writs (The Rutter Group), the authoritative treatise on civil appellate practice in California. He regularly speaks to both large and small groups of trial lawyers to provide helpful appellate law developments and advice about how to prepare and preserve their trial record to increase their chances of prevailing in any future appeal.

---

Adam W. Hofmann, Esq.
Deputy Judicial Appointments Secretary, Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law
Office of California Governor Gavin Newsom

Adam serves in the Office of California Governor Gavin Newsom as the Deputy Judicial Appointments Secretary, supporting the work of Judicial Appointments Secretary Luis Céspedes.Adam is an Appellate Specialist, certified by the California Board of Legal Specialization.

Previously, Adam served as the Co-Chair of Hanson Bridgett’s appellate practice group. He represented both public and private clients in civil writs, appeals, and mandate proceedings. He has briefed and argued cases in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and every District Court of Appeal in California and has filed merits briefs in two U.S. Supreme Court cases.

His practice focused on representing cities, counties, and special districts in writs and appeals relating especially relating to public finance and revenue measures, as well as land use, civil rights, employee benefits, labor standards, and election law. He has represented water districts and cities in a range of disputes regarding rates, fees, and charges, including work on some of the leading cases interpreting related provisions of the California Constitution, including the California Supreme Court’s decisions in Jacks v. City of Santa Barbara and City of San Buenaventura v. United Water Conservation District.

Outside of the office, Adam has coached regionally and nationally competitive moot-court teams at UC Davis School of Law. He also speaks and writes on questions of local government authority and policy under the California Constitution and is an adjunct professor who taught courses in local government and land use law at the University of San Francisco School of Law. Prior to joining Hanson Bridgett, Adam was also an extern in the chambers of the Honorable Martin J. Jenkins.

---

Dan Lawton, Esq.
Shareholder, Certified Specialist in Appellate Law
Klinedinst PC

Throughout his career in private practice, Dan Lawton has focused on civil trial work and complex commercial and intellectual property litigation on behalf of both plaintiffs and defendants. He also has a deep background in civil appeals, and is certified as a legal specialist in Appellate Law by the State Bar’s California Board of Legal Specialization. The certification is a distinction held by only 36 lawyers in San Diego County. His first job out of law school was a clerkship with Ninth Circuit Judge Thomas Tang.

Dan regularly counsels both corporate and individual clients in a variety of settings, often in negotiations and sometimes in transactions. His corporate clients have included companies whose stock is publicly-traded and companies whose stock is closely-held. They have included life sciences companies, pharmaceutical companies, manufacturers and distributors of various products, landowners and property developers, large corporations, a local major league baseball franchise, automobile dealerships, and “mom-and-pop” businesses. His individual clients have included officers, directors, and shareholders (both majority and minority) of corporations, bankers, elected officials, politicians, professional athletes and coaches, attorneys, accountants, land owners, entrepreneurs, and entertainers.

Dan has tried multiple jury trials, bench trials, and arbitrations, and litigated many cases to disposition short of trial (by way of motions to dismiss and for summary judgment). Dan has obtained settlements and judgments in his clients’ favor totaling tens of millions of dollars, and obtained what is believed to be the third-largest jury verdict in the legal history of Imperial County (for $14,286,461, after a nine-week jury trial). Over the span of more than 30 years, his caseload has included cases involving patent infringement, copyright infringement, trade secret theft, unfair competition, defamation, and business torts (such as trade libel and intentional interference with contractual relations). Dan has handled civil appeals and writs in both the California and federal courts. Dan has successfully litigated cases against some of the largest law firms and government agencies in the State of California.

In January 2009, Dan learned of his nomination for inclusion in 2009 San Diego Super Lawyers based on anonymous peer evaluation. He was so honored again in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 in the primary practice area of intellectual property litigation. Nominations for SuperLawyer designation are peer-driven, and fewer than 5% of lawyers in California earn the distinction. In 1997, two years after opening his own practice, Dan earned an “AV® Preeminent™ Peer Review Rated by Martindale-Hubbell.

Dan has been a team leader in the J. Clifford Wallace Chapter of the American Inns of Court since 2015. In that role, he has been responsible for putting on mandatory continuing legal education programs for the Inn, a group whose membership consists of lawyers and Judges and is by invitation only. In September 2015, Dan won an award for Best Program via anonymous peer vote for a short documentary he produced entitled “Avoiding Deathbed Regrets and Having Work/Life Balance.” The documentary combined excerpts of interviews with 25 local lawyers and Judges with data concerning work/life balance for attorneys and jurists.

Active within the legal and business community. Dan has participated in numerous charitable and pro bono programs. Dan has earned multiple Wiley W. Manuel awards for community service from the State Bar of California for pro bono work on behalf of indigent refugees fleeing persecution and seeking asylum in the United States. The San Diego Volunteer Lawyer Program awarded Dan its Distinguished Service Award in three separate years for his pro bono work on behalf of refugees.

---

Mary A. Lehman, Esq.
Principal, Certified Specialist in Appellate Law
Law Offices of Mary A. Lehman

Mary A. Lehman is southern California native and current principal of the Law Offices of Mary A. Lehman in Coronado, California. For over 30 years, she has practiced exclusively civil appeals and writs. She is a Certified Appellate Specialist with the State Bar of California and a Master in the San Diego Appellate Inn of Court. She has been awarded the “San Diego Super Lawyers” for Appellate Practice each year since 2009 and is recognized as among the Top 25 Women Attorneys in San Diego.

Ms. Lehman has served as a director and vice-president of the San Diego County Bar Association. She has been actively involved in legal organizations dedicated to improving both federal and state appellate practice and is a frequent presenter on these topics.

Ms. Lehman has a diverse background, including an undefeated professional boxer (ranked #9 in the world), “Hotshot” fire fighter with the USDA Forest Service, Mountain Ski Patrol, Wilderness Search & Rescue, Emergency Medical Technician, Motocross Racer and Certified Ski and Snowboard Instructor. Fluent in Spanish, she often serves as a volunteer attorney providing legal aid to refugees in the United States, Europe and Mexico. Ms. Lehman’s current passion is traveling the world to surf great waves.

---

Sean M. SeLegue, Esq.
Senior Counsel
Arnold & Porter

Sean M. SeLegue, described as a "very astute lawyer" in Chambers,* has developed two distinct areas of focus over more than 30 years of law practice.

Appeals. Mr. SeLegue brings rigorous analysis, lively writing and creativity to his appellate practice. He emphasizes teamwork with trial counsel while ensuring the client gets objective advice based on a fresh assessment of the matter. Chambers casts him as a "a top-flight appellate attorney." He is a certified appellate specialist, State Bar of California, a member and officer of the selective California Academy of Appellate Lawyers and a member of the invitation-only American Academy of Appellate Lawyers. Mr. SeLegue began his career in appellate law in 1991 with a clerkship for Judge Cynthia Holcomb Hall of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Since then, he has handled appeals in many areas, including energy law, products liability, real estate, partnership disputes, securities law, contract law and high-asset community property disputes in marital dissolution (divorce) cases.

Attorney Liability And Ethics. A former Chair of the State Bar of California Board of Trustees and the Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct, Mr. SeLegue has advised and represented dozens of lawyers and law firms. He has extensive experience in defending malpractice and malicious prosecution actions and attorney discipline defense. He has overseen internal investigations for law firms and has advised firms and appeared on their behalf, in investigations and inquiries by the State Bar and federal judges. Mr. SeLegue also has served as an expert witness.

*Chambers Ranking in Litigation: California Appellate category

---

Benjamin G. Shatz, Esq.
Partner, Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law
Duane Morris LLP

Benjamin G. Shatz is a partner in the firm’s Trial Practice Group, focusing on appellate advocacy and complex litigation matters. Benjamin represents clients in high-stakes appeals, writ proceedings, and discretionary review matters in state and federal courts across the country. His appellate experience spans a broad range of industries and legal issues, including complex commercial disputes, entertainment and copyright matters, employment litigation, real estate and land use, banking and insurance, product and professional liability, class actions, unfair competition, and anti-SLAPP proceedings.

Benjamin has argued and handled matters before the U.S. Supreme Court, multiple U.S. Courts of Appeals, the California Supreme Court, and the California Courts of Appeal. Earlier in his career, he served as a law clerk to the Honorable Robert J. Johnston of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada and as a judicial extern to the Honorable Dorothy W. Nelson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He is certified as a specialist in Appellate Law by the California Bar. A recognized thought leader in appellate law, Benjamin is a frequent author and speaker on litigation and appellate strategy.

Since 2018, he has written a monthly column for the Daily Journal titled Exceptionally Appealing and has served as editor-in-chief of California Litigation since 2013. His work has also appeared in California Lawyer, Los Angeles Lawyer, and the CEB Civil Litigation Reporter, among other publications. He is a member of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers and the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers and has been recognized by Chambers, The Best Lawyers in America, and other ranking organizations.

Benjamin is a magna cum laude graduate of the Pepperdine University school of Law, where he was Associate Editor of the Pepperdine Law Review and the California Supreme Court Survey.

---

Matt Stucky, Esq.
Counsel
Complex Appellate Litigation Group LLP

Matt Stucky spent nearly a dozen years learning how the justices of the California Court of Appeal decide cases.

As the supervising writs attorney at the Fourth District, Division One, of the California Court of Appeal in San Diego, Matt worked with the justices to review thousands of writ petitions. He advised the court on recommended dispositions for every type of petition and learned to differentiate between petitions destined for a summary denial and for writ relief. Before supervising the writs department, Matt collaborated with justices to draft hundreds of appellate opinions on scores of issues, including land use and environmental review, business and commercial litigation, real property, family law, employment, lawsuits involving public entities, civil procedure disputes, and anti-SLAPP law.

Before joining the court, he handled appeals in private practice.

Matt previously specialized in civil appeals with a large California law firm, where he drafted appellate briefs filed in California Courts of Appeal and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. He also regularly advised trial attorneys and drafted dispositive and post-judgment motions on complex legal issues to ensure they were preserved for appeal.

Matt has been involved with numerous San Diego civic organizations.

In recent years, he served with the North Park Community Planning Committee, the North Park Maintenance Assessment District Advisory Board, and the Circulate San Diego Policy Committee.

He graduated from the George Washington University Law School with honors.

Matt was a Notes Editor of the George Washington International Law Review, a member of the Student Bar Association, and he externed in law school with the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Three. He received his Bachelor of Science degree in biology from the University of California, San Diego.

---

Fees

Fees & Format Options

🎯 Early Bird Rate Deadline: Save $25 through December 15, 2026.
Discount applied automatically at checkout.

---

💻 OnDemand Streaming

Watch the recorded seminar on your own schedule, as often as you’d like, from any device. Access lasts six months from the date of purchase.

• Standard Rate: $429
• Early Bird Rate: $404*
• Includes: Seminar recording + written materials
• For individual use only

Group rates available for 3–4 attorneys. Licenses available for 5+ attorneys—contact us for details. info@pincusproed.com or (877) 858-3848.

---

📦 Recorded Packages (Download, DVD, or CD)

These packages are for a single viewer and include seminar materials.

▶️ Video Recording (Download or DVD)

• Standard Rate: $429
• Early Bird Rate: $404*
• For individual use only

🎧 Audio Only Recording (Download or CD)

Great for listening in your car or on the go.

• Standard Rate: $429
• Early Bird Rate: $404*
• For individual use only

🎥 + 🎧 Video + Audio Combo (Download, DVD, or CD)

• Standard Rate: $479
• Early Bird Rate: $454*
• For individual use only

Shipping & Tax: $12 shipping added to DVD/CD orders (plus sales tax in CA)

---

🗓️ Availability

This program will be recorded live on February 23 & 25, 2027.
OnDemand Streaming and Recorded Packages will be available approximately 2–3 weeks after the seminar. If you need access sooner, direct Zoom links will be provided.

---

⚠️ Important Notes

• OnDemand Streaming can be viewed on any device.
• Recorded Downloads must be downloaded to a computer first before transferring to another device. Files are delivered as a zipped folder containing the recording and written materials.

---

💼 Group Access & Licensing

Discounted rates are available for 3–4 attorneys (Live or OnDemand).
Licenses are also available for firms or agencies with 5+ attorneys.

To inquire or purchase group access:
📧 info@pincusproed.com | ☎ (877) 858-3848

CLE Credit

🎓 CLE Credit Information

California:
Approved for 7.0 General CLE credits.

Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law CLE Approval:

• CA CLS – Participatory (Appellate Law): 7.0 hours – Expires 02/22/2029
• CA CLS – Self-Study (Appellate Law): 7.0 hours – Expires 2/22/2032

New York:

This program is eligible for 7.0 General CLE credits under New York’s Approved Jurisdiction policy.
Pincus Professional Education is a California Accredited Provider, and California is an approved jurisdiction under Section 6 of the New York State CLE Board Regulations and Guidelines.

🌎 Other States

CLE credit is officially approved in the states listed above.
If you practice in a different state, we’re happy to help—upon request, we will provide the materials and information you need to apply for CLE credit on your own. Many of our past attendees have successfully obtained credit in other jurisdictions.

To request assistance:
📧 info@pincusproed.com | ☎ (877) 858-3848