10th Annual Advanced Appellate Practice Program (CA) [Two-Part Webinar] (OnDemand Streaming and Recorded Packages)

What You Will Learn

Agenda

Part 1: Tuesday, January 21, 2025
Part 2: Thursday, January 23, 2025

Times for both parts:
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. PST

Practitioners:  Harry Chamberlain, Michael G. Colantuono, Victoria Fuller, Jeffrey Gurrola, Mira Hashmall, Adam W. Hofmann, Robin Johansen, Dan Lawton, Mary A. Lehman, Judy E. Posner, Anne Rauch, Marli Reifman, Benjamin G. Shatz, Jocelyn Sperling

CA Appellate Justices: Hon. Daniel H. Bromberg, Hon. Martin N. Buchanan, Hon. Elena Duarte, Hon. Brian Hoffstadt, Hon. Michael J. Raphael, Hon. Maria E. Stratton

Judges: Hon. Helen E. Williams and Hon. Kira Klatchko

Appellate Courts Represented:

Second Appellate District, Division Two
Second Appellate District, Division Eight
Third Appellate District
Fourth Appellate District, Division One
Fourth Appellate District, Division Two
Sixth Appellate District

Part 1: Tuesday, January 21, 2025
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. (including breaks)

Faculty: Victoria Fuller, Jeffrey Gurrola, Adam Hofmann, Marli Reifman, and Jocelyn Sperling, Robin Johansen

Justices/Judges: Justice Martin Buchanan, Hon. Elena Duarte, Justice Brian Hoffstadt, Justice Michael Raphael, Justice Maria Stratton, 

Moderator: Benjamin G. Shatz

1:00 p.m. – 1:50 p.m.
Lessons for Civil Litigators from Court of Appeal Criminal Practice
Justice Brian Hoffstadt and Justice Michael J. Raphael

•  What are some common features, and strategies, that Court of Appeal justices see in criminal appeals?
• Are any of those features and strategies potentially applicable to civil appeals?

1:50 p.m. – 2:20 p.m.
Separate Opinions (Dissenting and Concurring)
Justice Martin Buchanan and Justice Elena Duarte

• Why does this matter to the appellate practitioner?
• What is their purpose?
• What are the pros and cons?
• Why are they so infrequent and is that changing?
• How do they differ from majority opinions in style and content?

2:20 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.
BREAK (10 min)

2:30 p.m. – 3:40 p.m.
Motions at the Court of Appeal
Justice Maria Stratton, Victoria Fuller and Marli Reifman

• Presiding judge motions
• APJ motions
• Panel motions
• How timing affects who hears your motion
• Requests for continuances of oral argument
• Motions to augment the record
• Motions to Dismiss
• Motions for Sanctions
• Uncommon motions
• Stipulated reversals
• Motion to amend the caption to include or exclude a party
• Other commonly made motions

3:40 p.m. – 3:45 p.m.
BREAK (5 min)

3:45 p.m. – 4:20 p.m.
A Review of Recent Issues in Appealability
Jeffrey Gurrola and Jocelyn Sperling

• Meinhardt and the Supreme Court’s bright-line rule for when the appeal clock starts running
• Further refinement on when California appellate courts will (and won’t) entertain an appeal from a nonappealable order
• Orders appealable as the “functional equivalent” of an order denying arbitration
• Developments in review of arbitration awards
• Developments relating to the collateral order doctrine

4:20 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Seeking Direct Relief from the California Supreme Court
Adam Hofmann and Robin Johansen

• When and how to seek direct relief
• How does the CA Supreme Court handle direct relief?
• What are the best practices for seeking direct Supreme Court relief?

 

Part 2: Thursday, January 23, 2025
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. (including breaks)

Faculty: Michael Colantuono, Harry Chamberlain, Mary Lehman, Robin Johansen, Anne Rauch, Judy Posner, Mira Hashmall and Dan Lawton

Justices: Justice Daniel Bromberg, Judge Kira Klatchko, and Judge Helen E. Williams

Moderator: Benjamin G. Shatz

1:00 p.m. – 2:05 p.m.
How to analyze your opposing counsel’s brief
Michael Colantuono, Mary Lehman and Justice Daniel Bromberg

• What’s the goal?
• What are the techniques?
• What are the tools? How to make good use of AI.
• A suggested approach
• A discussion with the panel of alternative approaches

2:05 p.m. – 2:15 p.m.
BREAK (10 min)

2:15 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
Record and Legal Citation Anomalies and Challenges
Mira Hashmall and Anne Rauch

• Websites
• Government resources
• Legal authorities (uncodified and foreign statutes, local laws)
• When you need to do a Motion for Judicial Notice (RJN)
• What format is best for citation
• AI Clear Brief’s linking of evidence to briefs

3:00 p.m. – 3:05 p.m.
BREAK (5 min) 

3:05 p.m. – 3:45 p.m.
How to Advise your Trial Attorney about Post-Trial Motions and the Appeal
Dan Lawton and Judy Posner

• JNOV motions
  • Appealability of an order denying a JNOV motion even if new trial is granted
  • The protective cross-appeal trap
• Motions to vacate judgment (C.C.P. § 663)
• Motions for new trial (C.C.P. § 657)
  • Examples of issues often raised: juror misconduct, excessive damages, insufficient evidence, verdict against law, instructional error, irregularities in proceedings
  • The 75-day clock of C.C.P. § 660 for new trial motions
  • The trial court’s duty to specify grounds for a new trial under C.C.P. § 657(7) and “strict compliance” required per Estes v. Eaton Corp.
  • Issues that are forfeited on appeal if not first raised in new trial motions
  • The trial court’s duty when deciding equitable issues after receiving advisory verdict
  • A word about jury misconduct and Evidence Code § 1150
• Impact of post-trial motions on the deadlines for filing a notice of appeal
• Miscellaneous procedural post-judgment motions
  • Motions to stay enforcement of judgment
  • Motions to require a bond/undertaking while judgment is stayed
  • Motions for fees and costs and to tax the same
• Recommended strategy for trial lawyers: act fast, consider all grounds, consult appellate counsel, respectfully “stomp your feet”

3:45 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Party Counsel and Amici Curiae
Judge Helen Williams, Judge Kira Klatchko and Harry Chamberlain

• Whom do you ask to file an Amicus Brief on behalf of your case?
• Why ask?
• Why write for an amicus?
• How do you become an amicus and support someone else’s case?
• Picking the right case
• Pitfalls
• Where can you find resources?
• Can you argue?
• Importance of Amicus to the discretionary appeal
• Getting your case into the CA Supreme Court
• The institutional amicus attorney
• Amicus brief funding
• Coordination with amicus counsel
• Simultaneous representation of a party and amicus curiae
• State and federal court disclosure requirements
• Ethical issues

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.

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

“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. 

“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.

“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.

“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 form 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.

“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.

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

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

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

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

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

“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.

“Excellent as usual. The insights from Justices and expert practitioners are so valuable. I attend this program regularly. The content is excellent and tailored for those of us that work in the appellate courts. The speakers are always knowledgeable it’s particularly useful to hear from judges and staff attorneys – the people who will be reading and deciding our matters- about best practices.” – Lori Sebransky, Esq.

“This seminar was excellent as always. Benjamin Shatz is no-nonsense, keeps things moving, and his approach is much appreciated. Hon. Michael Raphael had very helpful insights into oral arguments, including the inverted pyramid metaphor. The participation of such an esteemed and experienced advocate such as Rex Heinke was very helpful. Hon. Kira Klatchko had insightful observations and tips as always. John A. Taylor was well prepared with insightful comments. Susan Gelmis’ presentation of data was fascinating and helpful. It was very helpful to get Cory Webster’s insights as a semi-recent law clerk. Hon Jacqueline Nguyen had invaluable insights into the Ninth Circuit decision making process. I think Harry Chamberlain could read the phone book and make it sound compelling. Claudia Ribet had excellent insights and presented well; I look forward to seeing her on future panels. Gerald Serlin gave an excellent presentation. Dan Lawton provided helpful insights based on his experience.” – Tom Freeman, 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.

“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 prospectives from clerks, justices, and attorneys, making for a well-rounded presentation.” – Jenna Parker, 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.

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

“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.”

“This is the second time I have attended one of the Advance 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 worthwhile and useful.”

“Excellent as usual.”

“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.”

“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.”

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

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

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

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

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

“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.”

“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.

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

“Excellent. A++.”

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

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

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

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

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

“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.”

“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 Vollkov, Esq.

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

“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.

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

“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.

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

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

“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.”

“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 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.

“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.

“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.”

“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.

“Highly professional and substantive presentation.”

“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.

“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.”

“Enjoyed the program. Enjoyed Judge Klatchko’s discussion of standards of review.”

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

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

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

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

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

“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.”

“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.”

“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.

“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.”

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

“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.”

“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.

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

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

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

“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.”

“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.

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

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

“Excellent presentations.”

“Great program.” – Sara Birmingham, Esq.

“The program is great and incredibly informative.”

“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.

“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.”

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

“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.”

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

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

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

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

“Excellent program!”

“Great mix of topics!”

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

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

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

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

“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 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.”

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

“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 information 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.”

“Excellent.” – Ryan Artola, Esq.

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

“For me, the discussion by Colantuono, Chamberlin 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 docs/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.”

“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.

“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.”

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

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

“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 ghost writing. I think it was the most interesting conversation all day.”

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

“Wonderful!” – Chris Lim, Esq.

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

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

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

“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 run down of key components of litigation.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“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!”

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

“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.”

“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.

“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. Sup. 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.”

“Very thorough. Well done.” – Eric Troff, Esq.

“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 was 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.”

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

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

“Thoughtful, informative, and helpful.”

“Very current and useful information.”

“Was an excellent presentation, especially remotely.”

“I thought it was all very helpful.”

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

“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.”

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

“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
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
Justice
California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District

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. Elena J. Duarte
Associate Justice, California Court of Appeal
Third Appellate District

Justice Duarte was unanimously confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments on December 10, 2010, as an Associate Justice on the Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District.  Before she was elevated to the Court of Appeal, she was a Judge of the Sacramento County Superior Court from June 2008 to December 2010, and also a Judge of the Los Angeles County Superior Court from April 2007 to June 2008.  Before becoming a judge, she was a federal criminal prosecutor for 14 years in Sacramento, Los Angeles, and Washington D.C.

Active in her community, Justice Duarte regularly presides over local and national mock trial and moot court competitions for students from eighth grade through law school. She has mentored law students and young lawyers through her membership in various organizations and regularly visits high school classrooms to support government and civics education. She is a member of the steering committee of Operation Protect and Defend, a Sacramento-based organization of judges, lawyers, and teachers dedicated to promoting civics education for high school students. She is the immediate past President of the Anthony M. Kennedy American Inn of Court, an organization of judges, attorneys, and law students dedicated to promoting civility, ethics, and professionalism in the legal community, and continues as a member of the Inn’s Executive Committee.

In May 2015, Governor Brown appointed Justice Duarte to the Commission on Uniform State Laws.  She is also currently a member of the Judicial Council Advisory Committee on Civil Jury Instructions (CACI), the State-Federal Judicial Council, and the Center for Judicial Education and Research (CJER) Criminal Curriculum Committee. She is on the Third Appellate District’s Technology and Outreach Committees, and was on the Board of Directors for the California Bar Foundation from 2013 through 2015.

Born and raised in San Jose, California, Justice Duarte attended the Conservatory of Music at the University of the Pacific from 1984-1986. After receiving her Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Southern California (USC) in 1989, she obtained her law degree from Stanford Law School in 1992.

Upon graduation from Stanford, Justice Duarte moved from California to Washington, D.C., as one of 12 graduating law students selected nationwide to participate in the Attorney General’s Honor Program, Criminal Division, at the United States Department of Justice. While at the Department of Justice in Washington, she served as a Special Assistant United States Attorney, where she prosecuted criminal cases in the District of Columbia Superior Court.

In 1994, Justice Duarte returned to California as an Assistant United States Attorney in Sacramento from 1994-2000, prosecuting a wide variety of federal crimes from investigation through appeal. In 2000, she relocated to the Los Angeles Office of the United States Attorney, where she worked as an Assistant United States Attorney, first in the Major Frauds Section and later in the Cyber and Intellectual Property Crimes Section, becoming Section Chief in 2005. During her time in the Los Angeles office, she prosecuted complex fraud cases as well as all types of cyber and intellectual property rights crimes from investigation through appeal. While a federal prosecutor, she received numerous awards and commendations, including her September 2005 selection by the Daily Journal as one of the top 75 female litigators in California.

Justice Duarte has been an instructor of judicial education and has taught, lectured, and presented alone or as a panel member at Stanford Law School, San Francisco School of Law, University of Southern California Law Center, Santa Clara Law School, Loyola Law School, Southwestern Law School, King Hall at U.C. Davis, and Pacific McGeorge Law School, where she was an adjunct professor 2009-2010.

---

Hon. Brian Hoffstadt
Associate Justice
California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two

Brian Hoffstadt has served as an Associate Justice on the California Court of Appeal since 2014. Immediately prior to that, he served as a judge on the Los Angeles Superior Court for four years. As a lawyer, he practiced in both federal and California courts. Immediately after law school, he clerked for Ninth Circuit Judge Cynthia Holcomb Hall and U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. He then spent three years doing legal policy work for two different federal agencies in Washington, D.C., and the following six-plus years as an Assistant United States Attorney in Los Angeles, where he prosecuted criminal cases in federal district court and argued 26 appeals before the Ninth Circuit. In 2007, he joined the Issues and Appeals practice group at Jones Day, where he argued appeals and helped formulate trial strategy in state and federal court. He has been teaching law students, lawyers and judges for many years, is the author of California Criminal Discovery (5th ed.), has published nearly a dozen law review articles, and is a regular contributor to the Daily Journal. He was recently elected to the American Law Institute, and has served on the Executive Committee of the Appellate Judges Conference of the American Bar Association since 2015.

---

Hon. Michael J. Raphael
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 E. Stratton
Presiding Justice
California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District

Justice Stratton was born in Santa Monica, California and raised in San Diego, her father’s last duty station in the United States Navy.  She graduated magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Southern California and received her law degree from Boalt Hall at the University of California, Berkeley (now Berkeley Law).   She served as law clerk to United States Circuit Judge Harry Pregerson at both the U.S. District Court (before his elevation) and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.   

After clerking, Justice Stratton worked as a Deputy Federal Public Defender at the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the Central District of California in Los Angeles.  She was an associate at Overland, Berke, Wesley, Gits, Randolph and Levanas for a short time before joining Talcott, Lightfoot, Vandevelde, Woehrle & Sadowsky where she practiced criminal and civil litigation for ten years as an associate, partner, and a managing partner.   

In 1993, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit appointed Justice Stratton as the Federal Public Defender for the Central District of California where for twelve years she directed an office of 60 attorneys representing indigent federal criminal defendants at the trial and appellate levels and on post-conviction habeas corpus review.   She has served on the Ninth Circuit Capital Case and Capital Cost Oversight Committees and the Ninth Circuit Gender Bias Task Force Los Angeles Working Group.    

In 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger appointed Justice Stratton to the Los Angeles County Superior Court, where she served as Assistant Supervising Judge of the mental health departments of the criminal division, Assistant Supervising Judge of the Van Nuys courthouse, and Supervising Judge of the probate division.   From 2006 through 2018, she tried over 60 civil and criminal cases to jury verdict and presided over hundreds of civil and criminal bench trials.  Justice Stratton is also active in bench and bar education.   

---

Hon. Kira L. Klatchko
Judge and Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law
Superior Court of California, Riverside County

Judge Kira Klatchko was appointed to Riverside County Superior Court in 2016. She currently sits in Palm Springs in an unlimited civil department.

Before joining the bench, Judge Klatchko was a Civil Appellate Law Specialist, certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization and handled both state and federal appeals arising from all areas of civil practice for clients as varied as cities, businesses and families. Judge Klatchko was a partner at Lewis Brisbois, and served as was vice chair of the firm’s national Appellate Practice Litigation group. Prior to joining Lewis Brisbois, Judge Klatchko was a partner at Best Best & Krieger where she served as chair of the firm’s appellate group. She served for six years on the State Bar of California’s Standing Committee on Appellate Courts, including a term as its chair.

Judge Klatchko is co-author of the “California” chapter of the “Appellate Practice Compendium” (ABA 2012), an insider’s guide to appellate practice. She is co-contributing editor of “California Civil Appeals and Writs” (Matthew Bender 2014), a comprehensive two-volume practice guide for appellate counsel and general litigators. Judge Klatchko was repeatedly named to the list of Super Lawyers for Southern California in Appellate Law. She is a former president of the Riverside County Bar Association, and previously served five terms as chair of the Riverside County Bar Association Appellate Section. Judge Klatchko was also a member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers.

Judge Klatchko has served as an adjunct professor at La Verne College of Law, teaching legal research and writing. She has also lectured on appellate ethics and practice at numerous conferences and seminars, including the California State Bar Annual Convention, the State and Local Legal Center Supreme Court Practice Seminar, and Pincus Professional Education’s Annual Advanced Appellate Conferences in Los Angeles.  

In 2014, Judge Klatchko was inducted into the Desert Bar Association Hall of Fame, as Outstanding Young Attorney of the year. In 2010, Judge Klatchko was recognized by the City of Palm Springs and Palm Springs Chamber of Commerce with the Athena International Award for Young Professional Leadership, recognizing her professional success and work in the community. 

Judge Klatchko received her bachelor’s degree in political science, with distinction, from the University of California, Berkeley. She earned her master’s degree in business administration from the Executive Management Program at the Peter F. Drucker and Masatoshi Ito School of Management at Claremont Graduate University. She earned her law degree at the University of California, Davis, School of Law, where she served as editor-in-chief of the U.C. Davis Journal of Juvenile Law & Policy.

---

Hon. Helen E. Williams
Judge
Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County

Judge Helen E. Williams was appointed to the Santa Clara County Superior Court in 2012. She has sat in unlimited civil and criminal assignments, served as the court’s designated CEQA judge, and has served for nine years on the court’s Appellate Division, eight of those as its Presiding Judge. In 2022-2023, Judge Williams sat on assignment as a pro tem justice at the Sixth District Court of Appeal, authoring her own opinions without research assistance. Before joining the bench, Judge Williams, who is certified as an appellate specialist by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization, worked in chambers for eight years as a research attorney at the Sixth District Court of Appeal, focusing on civil and criminal cases and drafting opinions in those cases for the authoring justice. Before that, Judge Williams engaged in civil practice for 18 years beginning with a small litigation firm with her father and moving to larger firms with increasing focus on appellate specialization and dispositive motions such as summary judgment and anti-SLAPP, along with post-trial motions and other trial matters such as critical in limine motions and jury instructions. 

Judge Williams currently serves as a member of the Judicial Council of California’s Appellate Advisory Committee and previously served as a member of the Center for Judicial Education & Research’s Appellate Practice Curriculum Committee. She also served for six years on the State Bar of California’s Standing Committee on Appellate Courts, including terms as its vice-chair and chair. She further served for five years on the State Bar of California’s Board of Legal Specialization Appellate Law Advisory Committee, including terms as its vice-chair and chair. Judge Williams also served as the vice-chair and chair of the Bar Association of San Francisco’s Appellate Courts Section and as co-chair of the Appellate Court’s Committee of the Santa Clara County Bar Association. Judge Williams also currently serves as President Elect of the William Ingram Inn of Court, of which she has been a member for many years, and she is a member of the Board of Editors of the California Litigation Journal, now a publication of the California Lawyers Association Litigation Section. Judge Williams has served on panels for scores of MCLE and judicial education programs, principally on appellate topics. 

Judge Williams received her Bachelor of Arts degree in French Literature from the University of California at Santa Cruz. She earned her law degree from Santa Clara University School of Law, and is one of four members of that School’s class of 1986 to serve on the Santa Clara Superior Court bench. While in law school, Judge Williams served as an Articles Editor for the Santa Clara Law Review and, along with her brother, received the Moot Court award for Best Brief.

---

Harry W.R. Chamberlain, Esq.
Shareholder, Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law
Buchalter

Harry Chamberlain is a Shareholder of Buchalter, an Am Law 150 firm, with eleven Western U.S. offices. For over 40 years, he has served as trial and appellate counsel for Fortune 500 companies, and a variety of public and private sector clients in complex litigation matters. He is certified as an Appellate Specialist by the California State Bar Board of Legal Specialization, handling hundreds of appeals across the country, including numerous cases before the California Supreme Court and the highest courts of other states.                                                           

Before joining Buchalter, Harry was general counsel for California‐based professional liability insurers, and managed the law department of a national group of commercial insurance and financial service companies. He is past president of California Defense Counsel and the Association of Southern California Defense Counsel, preeminent associations of civil defense trial and appellate lawyers. He writes and lectures widely on topics regarding complex litigation, professional responsibility and insurance law.

---

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
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.

---

Mira Hashmall, Esq.
Partner
Miller | Barondess LLP

Mira Hashmall is an accomplished trial lawyer with a record of success in federal and state courts, and in arbitration.  She has been honored by the Daily Journal on its lists of Top 100 Lawyers in California, Top Women Lawyers, Top 40 Under 40, and Top Labor and Employment Lawyers.  Los Angeles Business Journal has recognized Mira on its lists of Top Litigators, Minority Leaders of Influence, Leaders in Law, Women’s Council & Awards, and Most Influential Women Lawyers.  Mira was honored by the Century City Bar Association as Employment Lawyer of the Year 2021.

Mira began her practice at a large, international law firm representing clients in complex litigation matters and defending employers in labor and employment disputes.  Since joining Miller Barondess, Mira has continued to diversify her practice and has achieved Top Verdict recognition on both the plaintiff and defense side.  She represents clients at every stage of litigation, from pre-litigation counseling to appellate proceedings, and is sought out to handle complex litigation involving business matters that have a broad legal impact.

In addition to her complex business practice, Mira defends private and public employers in high stakes litigation involving claims of harassment, discrimination, retaliation, wage and hour, and wrongful termination.  She also defends cases involving disability discrimination and accommodation, and family and medical leave rights.

Mira has a sophisticated appellate practice and is a Certified Specialist in Appellate Law, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.  Her federal appellate experience includes First Amendment, defamation and libel claims, insurance coverage issues, and employment disputes.  She has handled appeals involving real estate developments, contract disputes, whistle-blower actions, and malicious prosecution claims.  Mira also has extensive experience in anti-SLAPP litigation, both at the trial and appellate levels.

Mira is admitted to practice before all U.S. District Courts in California.  She received her B.A. in Political Science from the University of California, Berkeley, and her J.D. from the University of Southern California Gould School of Law.

---

Adam W. Hofmann, Esq.
Deputy Judicial Appointments Secretary
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.

---

Robin Johansen, Esq.
Senior Councel
Olson |Remcho

Robin B. Johansen is senior counsel with Olson Remcho.  She previously co-founded the law firm of Remcho Johansen & Purcell which merged with Olson Hagel & Fishburn LLP in January 2020 to form Olson Remcho.  Ms. Johansen was admitted to the California Bar in 1977 and the Bar of the District of Columbia in 1979.  She is a graduate of the University of Illinois (B.A., cum laude, 1968) and Stanford Law School (J.D., 1977).

Ms. Johansen was Senior Article Editor, Stanford Law Review, Volume 29, and is the author of “The New Federalism: Toward a Principled Interpretation of the State Constitution,” 29 Stanford Law Review 297, 1977 and “Searches and Seizures on Church Premises: Weighing the Privacy Rights of Religious Bodies” in Kelley, Government Intervention in Religious Affairs II.

Ms. Johansen is a member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers and appears on the Northern California Super Lawyers list.  She served on the Board of Directors of First Place for Youth, a statewide organization serving former foster youth and on the Board of Directors of Coro Northern California.  From 1992 to 1993, she was a member of the State Citizens’ Commission on Ballot Initiatives, and in 1974, Ms. Johansen was a research assistant to the U.S. House of Representatives’ Impeachment Inquiry staff.

Ms. Johansen has represented numerous local governmental entities on a variety of public policy issues and has worked extensively on matters involving the initiative and referendum process at both the state and local levels, and on matters of redistricting.  She has also represented a broad range of clients, including the California Legislature, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction and the State Controller, in public policy, school finance, and constitutional litigation in both state and federal courts. 

---

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 ,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.
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.

---

Judy E. Posner, Esq.
Partner, Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law
Benedon & Serlin, LLP

Judith (Judy) E. Posner has been an attorney at the appellate boutique law firm of Benedon & Serlin, LLP since 2015 and a partner since 2021. She previously worked as a Senior Judicial Attorney at the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, for Presiding Justice Frances Rothschild in Division One (2010-2015) and for Presiding Justice Dennis M. Perluss in Division Seven (2001-2007). In addition, Judy was of counsel at Crosby, Heafey, Roach & May (2001) and Reed Smith (2007-2010) and an associate at Horvitz & Levy LLP (1995-2001) and Sidley & Austin (1994-1995). Judy attended the University of California, Los Angeles (B.A., History, magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, College of Honors 1990) and UCLA School of Law (J.D. 1993), where she was a member and editor of the UCLA School of Law, Women’s Law Journal. Following law school, Judy served as a law clerk to the Hon. Melvin Brunetti (Dec.) on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1993-1994). Judy is a member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers and a Certified Specialist in Appellate Law by The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization. She was selected to the Southern California Super Lawyers, in Appellate Law, 2005-2006, 2019-2023 and recognized by Best Lawyers in America, in Appellate Law, 2019-2023, U.S. News & World Report – Best Lawyers.

---

Anne L. Rauch, Esq.
Partner, Certified Appellate Specialist
Berding & Weil LLP

Anne L. Rauch, a Partner with Berding|Weil, is board certified as an appellate specialist by the California Board of Legal Specialization for the State Bar. Her work on appeals and writs has resulted in wins in a broad range of practice areas including construction defect claims, real property litigation, business and partnership disputes, contract claims, insurance coverage, corporate governance and breach of fiduciary duty claims, and anti-SLAPP motions and appeals. While building her appellate practice, Anne acquired expertise in all aspects of common interest development law while also successfully navigating multi-million dollar construction defect claims for community associations from inception and the initial defect investigation through settlement, trial, and to successful conclusion on appeal. With that broad range of experience in both trial and appellate courts, Anne’s good work has resulted in many published decisions shaping the law of California, including the application of the attorney-client privilege to communications between Association’s litigation counsel and homeowners, the constitutional right to a jury trial, and refining the application of California’s anti-SLAPP statute to better protect Constitutional free speech and petitioning rights. Representative cases are listed below, to name a few published wins.

 

Anne has been selected as a “Super Lawyer” from 2021 through 2024.

 

Professional Experience

Anne brings important perspective to the firm’s litigation and appellate practice groups. Prior to joining Berding|Weil, Anne managed the civil litigation and appellate department for a successful San Diego-based boutique law firm concentrating on common interest developments and construction defect litigation. Well rounded with experience in both trial and appellate courts, Anne now handles all aspects of civil writs and appeals while providing important strategic advice to trial attorneys on how to win at trial to keep the victory on appeal. Anne also confidently and competently handles and guides dispositive motions and the trial and post-trial motion process, greatly improving chances of success in the ensuing appeal if necessary.

---

Marli F. Reifman, Esq.
Staff Attorney for Justice Feuer
California Court of Appeal, Second District, Div. Seven

For the past eight years Marli Reifman has worked as a senior appellate court attorney at the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Seven. 

Prior to working at the court, Ms. Reifman specialized in insurance recovery litigation at Reed Smith LLP and business and commercial litigation and Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP. 

She graduated with honors from Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in 2007 and served as a law clerk to Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson in the Eastern District of New York and Judge Claire V. Eagan in the Northern District of Oklahoma.

---

Benjamin G. Shatz, Esq.
Partner, Certified Legal Specialist in Appellate Law
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Ben Shatz is a certified specialist in appellate law who has briefed hundreds of civil appeals, writs and petitions in state and federal courts covering areas of law including employment, entertainment, copyright, trademark, land use, banking, insurance, product liability, professional liability, wrongful death, punitive damages, class actions, anti-SLAPP and unfair competition. Before private practice he served as law clerk to Robert J. Johnston, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Nevada, and as extern to Dorothy W. Nelson, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Ben is Editor-in-Chief of California Litigation, the journal of the State Bar’s Litigation Section, chairs the Los Angeles County Bar Association’s State Appellate Judicial Evaluations Committee and serves on the executive committee of LACBA’s Appellate Courts Section. He is a past Chair of the State Bar Committee on Appellate Courts and the LACBA Appellate Courts Committee.

Since 2005, Ben has coordinated lawyer volunteers for the ACE (Appellate Court Experience) program, in which high school students visit the Second District Court of Appeal, for which he was honored as Lawyer of the Year (Private Sector 2008) by the Constitutional Rights Foundation. He has been named a Southern California Super Lawyer in Appellate Practice (2004-2015); listed in Best Lawyers in America for appellate practice (2012-2015); and is AV-Preeminent rated by Martindale-Hubbell.

Ben is a frequent lecturer and publisher of articles on appellate practice, is an editorial consultant for the Matthew Bender Practice Guide on California Civil Appeals & Writs, and blogs at Southern California Appellate News (http://socal-appellate.blogspot.com).

---

Jocelyn Sperling, Esq.
Counsel
Complex Appellate Litigation Group LLP

Jocelyn Sperling handles a wide range of civil appeals.

For more than a decade, she has represented clients in civil appeals and writ petitions in the California Courts of Appeal and Ninth Circuit. Her diverse practice includes employment, tort, contract, real property, and attorney fee matters. Before joining CALG, she was an appellate lawyer at Bien & Summers and at her own firm, and litigated cases at a boutique employment firm earlier in her career.

She was a law clerk and staff attorney at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Jocelyn worked at the Ninth Circuit for five years, serving as a law clerk to Judge Richard A. Paez and later as a staff attorney for the Court. She was also a research attorney at the Alameda County Superior Court and an extern in the federal district court. In these positions, she gained insight into effective advocacy and the judicial decision-making process, along with practical knowledge of how the trial and appellate courts work. Jocelyn is active in the legal community, and writes and speaks on appellate law.

She serves on the Committee on Appellate Courts of the California Lawyers Association’s Litigation Section, where she has led key access-to-justice projects. She is co-founder and vice chair of the Alameda County Bar Association’s Appellate Law Section, and chair of the ACBA’s Judicial Appointments Evaluation Committee. Jocelyn also co-authors a chapter on appealability in CEB’s California Civil Appellate Practice and frequently speaks on appellate issues.

In addition to her retained work, she routinely handles pro bono work for Centro Legal de la Raza, a nonprofit organization in Oakland that provides free legal services to low-income communities.

Jocelyn graduated Order of the Coif from UCLA School of Law. She was in the first class of UCLA Law’s Program in Public Interest and Policy and served as as an editor of the Law Review. She earned her undergraduate degree from Duke University, graduating magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa.

---

Fees

Seminar Materials are included with OnDemand and all recorded package options.

OnDemand Streaming!  On-Demand Streaming allows for a single person to view the seminar unlimited times until one year after the seminar is held.

Recorded Packages!  Recorded Packages allow for a single person to download and view the program recording and are also available via DVD or CD.

Discounted rates are available for 2-4 attorneys at your firm.  Licenses are available for law firms or agencies that would like to distribute the video package or OnDemand Streaming access to more than four attorneys at their firm or agency.

Fees:

OnDemand Streaming:  $454

Recorded Packages via Download or CD/DVDs:

Video Recording – DVD or Download: $454

Audio Only (for in your car, etc.) Recording – CD or Download:  $454

Order both the Video and Audio Only Packages for only $50 more – Download, DVD or CD: $504

$10 shipping and sales tax (in California) are added at checkout to DVD/CD orders.

This program will be recorded live on January 21 & 23, 2025. Because we record our seminars live and they are edited, OnDemand Streaming and Recorded Packages are available approximately two to three weeks after the seminar is held.

Your OnDemand access is good for up to one-year from the time of purchase.  Please be sure to select OnDemand Streaming to the right and check out. OnDemand can be watched from any type of device.

*The Video recording is a video of the webinar (with sound). The Audio Only recording are audio files only and are for those who wish to listen to it without watching a video (such as in the car or while walking).

Note: OnDemand Streaming can be watched from any device. However, all download packages must be downloaded to a computer first, before transferring them to another device due to downloading as zip files containing both the video/audio and a large folder with seminar materials contained in the download package.

CLE Credit

CA General: This program is approved for 7.0 units of general CLE in California.

CA Participatory Certified Legal Specialist: This program is approved for 7.0 hours of Legal Specialization Credit in Appellate Law. (Expires 01/20/2027)

CA Self Study (only) Certified Legal Specialist (for recorded packages): This program is approved for 7.0 hours of Legal Specialization Credit in Appellate Law. (Expires 01/20/2030)

NY General: This course is eligible for approval, under New York’s CLE Approved Jurisdiction policy, for up to 7.0 CLE units. Pincus Professional Education is a CA Accredited Provider, which is a NY approved jurisdiction. See Section 6 of the New York State CLE Board Regulations and Guidelines for further information.

This program is approved for CLE in the states listed above.  Upon request, Pincus Pro Ed will provide any information an attorney needs to support their application for CLE approval in other states other than what is listed above. Many attorneys ask for this and are approved in other states.