19th Annual Superior Court Boot Camp: The Nuts and Bolts (CA) (Recorded Package and OnDemand Streaming)

What You Will Learn

 

Judges commenting throughout seminar: Hon. Harold W. Hopp, Hon. Kira L. Klatchko, Hon. Joseph Quinn and Hon. Laura A. Seigle 

Part 1:  Tuesday, Sept. 24, 2024
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. PDT
(Including breaks)

Judges Commenting throughout Part 1: Hon. Harold W. Hopp and Hon. Joseph Quinn

1:00 p.m. – 2:15 p.m.
The Early Parts of your Case: Themes, Complaints, Answers, and More.
Brad Estes and Meghan Loisel

• Early case assessment and themes
• The Complaint – advice and strategies
• Answering the complaint
• Defenses vs. Affirmative Defenses
• Motions directed at the pleadings
• Motions to Dismiss
• Motions for a More Definite Statement
• Motions to strike
• Practice pointers and pitfalls
• Additional important rules
• Mistakes not to make

2:15 p.m. – 2:25 p.m.
BREAK

2:25 p.m. 2:40 p.m.
Case Management
Hon. Harold Hopp

• The Case Management Conference (CMC)
• Complex Civil Cases

2:40 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Depositions
Rachel Gezerseh and Jason Liang

• State v. Federal rule differences
• Timelines and deadlines
• Deciding whom to depose
• Taking good depositions – mistakes not to make
• Making effective use of depositions at trial
• Using depositions for settlement talks
• Objections to depositions
• Dealing with difficult counsel
• Bringing in the judge
• Preparing your client
• Preparing your expert witness
• Deposition related sanctions motions

4:00 p.m. – 4:35 p.m.
Other Motions
Hon. Harold Hopp

• Continuances
• Ex Parte Motions
• TROs and Preliminary Injunctions
• Sanctions
• Common hearings

4:35 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Final Q&A

 

Part 2: Thursday, Sept. 26, 2024
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. PDT
(Including breaks)

 Judges commenting throughout Part 2: Hon. Kira L. Klatchko and Hon. Laura A. Seigle 

1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.
Discovery and E-Discovery
Zach Streiff and Mythily Sivarajah

• Deciding what matters to your case
• New discovery / E-Discovery rules
• Scope of discovery / proportionality
• Interrogatories, Requests for Production and responses
• Failure to preserve / sanctions
• Subpoenas and Affidavits
• Meet and confer requirements/creating a good record
• Considerations for trial and settlement
• Key Rules, timelines and overlooked deadlines
• Common procedural issues
• Motions to Compel/for Protective Order
• Cost cutting measures
• Dealing with unresponsive opposing counsel
• Additional E-Discovery specific issues: costs, authentication, sources and preservation

2:30 p.m. – 2:40 p.m.
BREAK

2:40 p.m. – 3:45 p.m.
Motions for Summary Judgment
Becca Furman and Jesse Lanier

• Timing
• Strategic considerations
• Cost considerations
• Writing persuasive briefs
  • Intro
  • Headers
  • Content
  • Conclusion
• Mistakes to avoid
• What judges want, need and don’t want to see
• Oral Argument tips

3:45 p.m. – 3:55 p.m.
BREAK

3:55 p.m. – 4:35 p.m.
Pre-Trial Matters
Sebastian Kaplan

• Pretrial Conference and Order
• Trial Briefs
• Pretrial Statement
• Motions in Limine
• Final Status Conference
• Trier of Fact decisions

4:35 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Final Q&A

Testimonials

“Michele Ellson with Open Door Legal here. I wanted to thank you and your team for a fantastic program. I also wanted to thank you for giving four of our staff scholarships to attend. We are all new practitioners and, being legal aid, have extremely limited professional development funding at our disposal. As such, I wanted to let you know that the program was hugely impactful for us, both in terms of our learning and in terms of managing our limited resources. The program was very helpful for me in terms of framing how to prosecute or defend a litigation matter and I am already putting some of the suggestions to use. And of course, a learning opportunity that is impactful for us as practitioners is beneficial for our clients, most of whom have nowhere else to go for legal representation.

Thank you so much for your generosity in supporting us as practitioners and, by extension, our clients and their communities. We are grateful for your investment in us and our work.” – Michele Ellson, Open Door Legal, CA

“The program was great and moved fast. The speakers were all high-level, experienced attorneys.” – Harold Anderson, Esq. 

“Great group and great information.” – Patricia Pangelinan, Esq. 

“Excellent general introduction to civil litigation.  I found it informative and enjoyed the agenda and material.” – Efigenia Dominguez, Esq. 

“Excellent instruction and material.” – Douglas Fransham, Esq.  

“I really appreciated all of the judge’s additional comments. Lots of great information. Excellent practical advice.” – Mary Grace Guzmán, Esq.

“Very valuable for me — a second-year admittee to California.  Great practical advice as well as explanations regarding Cal procedure.” – Mark Yost, Esq.

“I really enjoyed your comments and felt that the explanations were thorough. I also appreciated you answering questions as they came.” – Stevie Jo McDonald, Esq.

“I think the deposition tips was likely the most useful but the complaint drafting portion was also very good.” – Marjorie Menza, Esq.

“I am glad I took this course. I felt it did an excellent job at bringing up what attorneys should expect with Los Angeles Superior Court, its local rules and what judges expect to see when a case is presented to them.” – Matthew Haddad, Esq.

“I thought it was excellent!! I feel much more competent in my knowledge of the timeline and practice tips for litigation.” – Ashleigh Dennis, Esq.

“I thoroughly enjoyed the presentation and especially the speakers. I thought it was interesting, well organized, spaced out comfortably over the course of a day and that the speakers gave valuable insight from their careers and helpful advice as to how they’ve come across specific cases that invoked the rules they were discussing.” – Matthew Haddad, Esq.

“I think it is very helpful to new attorneys. Sometimes the procedures are theoretical at best, so hearing perspectives from practitioners and judges is helpful.” – Tarin Robinson, Esq.

“Great information. I just took the bar in July so this is a nice crash course on handling cases.” – Stacie Scarf, Esq.

“The speakers were all very knowledge. Their individual perspectives and practice pointers were appreciated.” – Kyle R. Roberson, Esq.

“The speaks were prepared and the presentations were organized. The practice pointers from the judges and attorneys were incredibly helpful.” – Kyle R. Roberson, Esq.

“The information in session two was practical (especially the handouts).” – Roberta Ponce, Esq.

“Excellent detailed program with effective speakers, well-organized and clear written points.” – Brian Beckwith, Esq.

“Program is a good bird’s-eye view of litigation.” – Silviana Dumitrescu, Esq

“Great first day of the program and great speakers, [they] focused on the most important parts of the material they wanted to present, and it was helpful to hear from current judges on what they like/don’t like to see in written briefs/motions.” – Rosemary Bautista, Esq.

“I thought the program was really engaging. I enjoyed the interactions between the litigation attorneys and the judges.” – Natalie Klasky, Esq.

“It was a fabulous presentation. Thank you.” – Cheryl Nelson, Esq.

“Great explanation of the law and examples by practitioners clearly versed on the topics presented really helped me understand the applicability of the subject matter.” – Rahman Gerren, Esq.

“Very thoughtful practice insights, and interesting perspectives from the judges.” – Yujin Rosa Chong, Esq.

“Overall this CLE was very helpful with several questions pertaining to some of my current cases.” – Casey Stone, Esq.

“Presenters were fabulous.” – Marjorie Menza, Esq.

“I liked hearing from the judges directly.” – Corrie Meals, Esq.

“Excellent overview of civil litigation from filing of complaint through post-judgment appeal. The speakers were engaging, informative, and even entertaining!” – Brendan Malone, Esq.

“I like the fact that practitioners and judges were exchanging ideas.” – Rouzbeh Zarrinbakhsh, Esq.

“Great information provided! Thank you!” – Daniel Zhivanaj, Esq.

“The program provided a lot of information relevant to my practice.” – Casey Stone, Esq.

“Part 2 was very helpful and covered critical pre-trial issues related to discovery and summary judgment.” – Kyle R. Roberson, Esq.

“Honestly this was pretty perfect in terms of providing a quick primer on litigation practice.” – Michele Ellson, Open Door Legal, CA

“Judges Cho and Hopp were my favorites. I enjoyed listening to this discussion.” – Ricardo Merluza, Esq.

“I was pleased to hear the practical viewpoints, both from a practitioner’s viewpoint and from the bench…A very informative program…I would recommend this program to any newbie like myself.” – Shawheen Shafizadeh, Esq.

“I thought it was a great high-level overview, which is what I expected and what I was looking for.” – Christine Fries, Esq.

“Great information; commentary by judges was invaluable.” – Stevie Jo McDonald, Esq.

“The involvement and prospective from the judge panelists were insightful as a practitioner.” – Kyle R. Roberson, Esq.

“Very helpful information about MSJ and trial process.” – Taylor McElroy, Esq.

“Great program with helpful information and insight.” – Kayla Washington, Esq.

“Very well organized. Appreciated that it was not mired in technical statute recitation and was instead a more broad overview…overall, excellent program for inexperienced attorneys like myself.” – Kevin Miller, Esq.

“It was a great review.” – Susie Jane Eastwood, Esq.

“Fabulous!” – Sharvonne R. Sulzle, Esq.

“Fantastic program. I’m in my 3rd year of practice and it was the perfect timing for this program.” – Alison Karp, Esq.

“Overall, great experience. This was my first superior court boot camp, so all information was relevant and interesting. All speakers had strong knowledge of the material they were presenting.” – Carlos Portillo, Esq.

“The topics covered all critical civil pre-trial areas.” – Kyle R. Roberson, Esq.

“The program was great, and hearing direct feedback from judges was so useful (especially the part about filing discovery sanctions etc).” – Roberta Ponce, Esq.

“See above. I’m a brand-new lawyer and litigator and this was a very helpful quick and dirty on how to trial.” – Michele Ellson, Open Door Legal, CA

“Learned a lot. Many different topics were covered. Good reference material for future use.” – Natalya Samsonova, Esq.

“Amazing course!” – Nicholas Lansdown, Esq.

“Great program. I truly appreciated the practical points offered by the presenters. I enjoyed the program very much and will recommend it to fellow attorneys. The thing that I liked the most is that the presenters did not re-read the handouts, but rather provided precious, practical-experience advice and tips.” – Boryana Arsova, Esq

“Very informative for us litigators; thank you. Very engaging and informative speakers.” – Cameron Bordner, Esq.

“Great speakers!” – Adam Wentland, Esq.

“My personal objectives were completely satisfied – I left feeling like I had several new ideas and tools I could apply to my work immediately.” – Sally Mielke, Esq.

“This was a very nice overview of trial prep that boosted my confidence as I prep for my trial.” – Nicholas Colla, Esq.

“Very good overview. Excellent insights from the viewpoint of judges.” – Michael A. Miller, Esq.

“Provided information that was useful and practical in assisting me with being a competent litigator and performing my job duties. Great speakers. Judge Kleinberg was very good at providing hypotheticals that relate to real-life experience. Speakers provided useful information as to when and whether to request a trial by jury and the use of pre-emptory challenges. Judge Ulmer was good at providing trial strategy as well as tips on jury selection and what to look out for (i.e., whether the jury will award damages).” – Christina Brogden, Esq.

“I enjoyed the program. The speakers were very knowledgeable and well prepared.” – Joseph Dankert, Esq.

“I loved that the panel included plaintiffs’ attorneys, defense attorneys, mediators, and judges.” – Cheryl Nelson, Esq.

“Great information.” – Mark Yost, Esq.

“Very satisfied. Thank you.” – Sandra Aguila, Esq.

“The speakers were very qualified, informative and entertaining, and that made a major difference in making this course helpful and valuable.” – Matthew Haddad, Esq.

“Great program. Great to hear from the perspective of the bench.” – John Alexander, Esq.

“Very helpful to see the forest from the trees. As a new litigator, it’s easy to get lost in and lose sight of the big picture. Subject matter seemed right on point for helping me in day-to-day practice…Speakers gave lots of practical examples, thorough explanations, and tips.” – Lauren Cox, Esq.

“Very helpful primer on discovery, motions, and pretrial practice. I took a lot of notes!” – Michele Ellson, Open Door Legal, CA

“Very Satisfied.” – Charlotte Martinez, Esq.

“Very informative. Great speakers. Liked the Judges’ input. It was all very good. Getting a judge’s opinion is always helpful.”

“I wanted an overview from beginning to end and that’s exactly what we got.” – Griselda Rodriguez, Esq.

“Comprehensive review…Excellent speakers…Great program. Very helpful information and format.” – Melissa Murphy, Esq.

“Excellent: Extremely dense with very helpful practice tips, punctuated by revealing anecdotes. Speakers gave a very thorough analysis of every aspect of the topic assigned, yet made it easy to follow and understand.” – Michael A. Miller, Esq.

“A great, comprehensive overview of motion and trial practice…Great insight from the judge.” – Anna Mezhebovskaya, Esq.

“Good information on a wide area of topics. Panel provided broad brush overview of each topic while also focusing on key specifics and practice tips.” – Joseph Seltzer, Esq.

“All the speakers were excellent. The war stories were great, and so were all the tips about the rules.” – Daniel S. Kirschbaum, Esq.

“Very practical and specific.” – Kathleen Bricken, Esq.

“Very informative to bridge the gap for new attorneys. This was exactly what I needed to get an overview of litigation.” – Donald Le, Esq.

“The high-level overview is very helpful as a new attorney in trial. The personal stories were also very insightful. Great stories. I liked to hear about the judge’s time on the bench and what he didn’t like.” – Bridget Cho, Esq.

“Information and materials were very detailed and easy to follow. Perfect for new attorneys without experience and experienced needing refresher.” – Sanaz Bereliani, Esq.

“Litigation process was comprehensively covered.” – Jackson Morgus, Esq.

“This program gave a great overview of the different stages of litigation in a short amount of time.” – Heidi Kim, Esq.

“Absolutely spectacular.  Great advice and insights from experienced litigators and judges.” – Mark Yost, Esq.

“I’m a brand-new litigator and this is exactly the basic training I have been looking for. Thank you so much!” – Michele Ellson, Esq.

“I thought the presentation was very thorough and I appreciated how quickly each panelist responded to questions.” – Taurin Robinson, Esq.

“Very valuable insight and all presentations were informative and engaging.” – Isabella Rosa Schrammel, Esq.

“The materials were presented in a comprehensible way.  The materials were not overly complicated or overwhelming.  New practitioners and experienced could easily follow along.” – Roberta Ponce, Esq.

“Very good refresher that was presented in a practical way.  Legal authority citations were very helpful as well.  Real world examples were given by experienced judges and practitioners.” – Casey Stone, Esq.

“Although, I’ve practiced nearly 30 years in other states, this course was very helpful given my recent licensure in CA. I highly recommend it for the transferring lawyer.” – James A. Morris, Jr., Esq.

“Great sharing of invaluable experiences.” – John Quiring, Esq.

“Informative and good written materials…Great work, everyone!” – Eli Flushman, Esq.

“Very validating and also good food for thought. This was very thorough training.” – Heidi Lehrman, Senior Councel, CA Department of Managed Health Care

“This was a great overview of the litigation process.” – Joshua R. Driskell, Esq.

“It was a great program. I really learned a lot.” – Teressa Libutti, Esq.

“The course helped to reinforce what I learned at my prior firm.” – Cleve Collado, Esq.

“Great speakers, very informative.” – Alexander Cabeceiras, Esq.

“Well done, organized, great personal stories in court, and great advice.” Jonathan Kantor, Esq.

“Excellent.” ­ – Suzanne Kenney, Esq.

“Good program. Would do another Pincus program again.” – Michael Edward Olsen

“I received a better understanding of later parts of the life of a case. This was helpful to put things in perspective. I have a better understanding of how to run my cases and had a few new ideas during this training.” – Adam Truong, Esq.

“I thought the speakers were knowledgeable and kept things engaging with personal anecdotes. I appreciated the level of detail, as did the fellows at my office.” – Sara Haji, Esq.

“The speakers all had insightful information to provide. I appreciated the information about personal experiences.” – Stacie Scarf, Esq.

“I think this program is great and should be required for all practitioners.  I especially appreciated the admonitions to act with professionalism and courtesy – because as the panelists observed, that is not always the standard of behavior.” – Roberta Ponce, Esq.

“Thanks! Great program. I enjoyed it.” – Sarah Castelhano, Esq.

“It was well presented information, from well qualified presenters.” – Oliver Foland, Esq.

“The information presented was good for a basic litigation knowledge.” – Kyle R. Robertson, Esq.

“This was a very, very helpful overview of trial procedure basics.” – Michele Ellson, Esq.

“Great course! Very informative and basic enough for beginners. All well prepared and great presence.” – Christina H. Johansen, Esq.

“Good presentation – I like the panel format.” – Barry E. Weber, Esq.

“Enjoyed overall presentation and topics.” – Greg Kreausian, Esq.

“Great overview. This is a great opportunity to brush up my knowledge.” – Michael Waddington, Esq.

“Insight from judges was helpful.” – Jillian Sekona, Esq.

“I really enjoyed the session on ex partes and motions.” – Allison Andersen, Esq.

“Great presentations.” – Corrie Meals, Esq.

“It was very informative.” – Taylor McElroy, Esq.

“Interesting dos and don’ts of trial. Well-organized and highly informative. Good beginner course.” – Stephanie Drenski, Esq.

“Very good and informative.” – Charlotte Martinez, Esq.

“Informative. Great practice pointers. All topics were valuable.” – Cameron Bordner, Esq.

“Pincus always produces high-quality programing.”

“The overall overview of the process was exactly what I was looking for.”

“I enjoyed that they went into great detail on depositions.” – Joseph Dankert, Esq.

“Good, practical tips.” – Tiffany Truong, Esq.

“Thorough.” – Alexander Wallin, Esq.

“Great overview.” – Timothy Laquer, Esq

“Good information beyond the basic rules!” – Sara Haji, Esq.

“I thought it was a good introduction into the topics, which is what I was hoping to get.” – Oliver Foland, Esq.

“I learned a great deal about Superior Court practice.” – Victor Leving, Esq.

”Pincus has the best programs – great topics and dynamic speakers.”

“I thoroughly enjoyed the presentation and especially the speakers. I thought it was interesting, well organized, spaced out comfortably over the course of a day, and that the speakers gave valuable insight from their careers and helpful advice as to how they’ve come across specific cases that invoked the rules they were discussing.” – Matthew Haddad, Esq.

“The panels both did a good job of progressing through the content with thoughtful, relevant insight.” – Adam Stone, Esq.

“Interesting panel and topics.” – Shelley Crawford, Esq.

“Thank you for the resources via email – They are the practical information that I was looking for.” – Carol Wyzinski, Esq.

“All speakers had strong knowledge of the material they were presenting.” – Carlos Portillo, Esq.

“Interesting and helpful insights.” – John Jackman, Esq.

“Very informative!” – Lindsay R. Wood, Esq.

“This class was very helpful and informative.” – Portasha Moore, Esq.

“Covered a wide range of topics…great materials.” – Nicole Fassonaki, Esq.

“Very helpful for a junior attorney like me.” – Cornelo Dilag, Esq.

“Very entertaining and lots of practical advice.” – Kate Juvinall, Esq.

“Great content and practical tips.” – Lori Liu, Esq.

“Great program.” – Jillian Sekona

“Very thorough!” – Jason Benkner, Esq.

“The speakers were good.” – Aleks Giragosian, Esq.

“Judge Raphael had great insights and advice; learned something new – ‘informal discovery request’ and requesting continuance prior to summary judgment.” – Jamie Lee, Esq.

“I enjoyed all the speakers…the afternoon session was my favorite.” – Dana Udi, Esq..

“Very satisfied. Took away a lot of excellent recommendations that I will apply in my practice.” – Raychele Sterling, Esq.

“Great general overview with tips.” – Flor Tataje, Esq.

“Really enjoyed Judge Krasnow’s commentary!” – Aurora Thorne, Esq.

“This was the only valuable MCLE I have attended in years.”

“Well done. Well planned. Great topics.” – Mike Voigt, Esq.

“All speakers were very good. Will recommend.” – Tom Skinner, Esq.

“Judge Cho was a really powerful speaker, delivery of material was excellent.”

“It was a great program. I really learned a lot.” – Teressa Libutti, Esq.

“Overview of civil procedure in all presentations was informative.” – Afret Canchan, Esq.

“Checklists and outlines were very helpful.” – Natilee Riebman, Esq.

“It was very good.” – Chris Moody, Esq.

“Overview of civil procedure in all presentations was informative.” – Afret Canchan, Esq.

“The interactive comments in the afternoon were very good…Thanks for the program. For 7.5 hours, it was very good.” – Robert Goldman, Esq.

“I was very pleased with the program. Each and every speaker provided a great presentation. I learned so much!” – Deedra Van Stren Alvarado, Esq.

“I left more insightful, informed, and with a lot more knowledge to further my practice. Very well put together and concise. The selection of speakers and materials provided were extremely helpful.” – Frank Chica, Esq.

“Thank you for a great day, very informative and excellent practice tips.” – Mollie Levy, Esq.

“It was great! Great insight for me as a law student, although I haven’t taken civil procedures yet.” – Tanner Murray

“Great presentations. Very insightful with great tips for new attorneys.” -Kyle W., Esq.

“Great speakers, very informative. Loved the war-stories/anecdotes.” – Alexander Cabeceiras, Esq.

“I thought it was excellent!! I feel much more competent in my knowledge of the timeline and practice tips for litigation.” – Ashleigh Dennis, Esq.

“All the speakers were excellent. The war stories were great as well as the tips about rules.” – Daniel S. Kirschbaum, Esq.

“Enjoyed!” – Ben Armistead, Esq.

“Great.” – Sydney Muraoka, Esq.

“Very helpful for a junior attorney like me.” – Cornelo Dilag, Esq.

“The program was as advertised: nuts and bolts of litigation. Lots of good info at a cursory level.” – Katherine Beyer, Esq.

“I really enjoyed all the sessions in the afternoon and morning.” – Yessenia Carrilb, Esq.

“Thank you!” – Ashley Nakai, Esq.

“A good reminder of transactional issues.” – Thomas Rivera, Esq.

“Overall, great experience, the material was very relevant. Great practical tips. Thank you!” – Nikole Trinidad, Esq.

“While I graduated from law school well over a decade ago, I’ve been a non-litigation compliance attorney.  In my new role, litigation is a possibility.  Hence, I attended this course.  It was an excellent refresher and quickly took the dust off of what I learned in Civil Procedure in law school/bar prep, plus I learned more such as including a request for jury trial in state court in case it gets removed to federal court.”

“I thought each panelist was very informed and had real, practical insights to help flesh out the types of conduct that is expected and (more importantly to me) what type of conduct isn’t to be tolerated and how to put those issues into the record to mitigate those issues.”

“It’s tough to balance getting out all the necessary information and sharing personal experiences. I appreciated it when the speakers’ spoke from their actual experiences.”

“Each of the speakers was excellent. I would have liked to be able to listen to the entire program.” 

“The presentation today was a good refresher and offered numerous practical pointers that are worth considering during these stages of litigation.”

“Substance was very good, but more detail would be hlepful.  Maybe this could be accomplished by having people’s questions answerred at the end and not during the MCLE portion, if MCLE rules allow, or limiting question time.”

“I appreciated when the speakers shared their personal observations about how certain things really work and tips for effectiveness.”

“Very informative overall, I appreciated it and found the program very useful for my day-to-day practice.”

“Very educational.” 

“Appreciated the years of expertise on the panels, practice tips, and resources!” 

“Overall great program.”   

“I appreciated the variety of background expertise of the panelists.” 

“This was one of the best programs I’ve attended for MCLE credit. Approximately 50-60% of the material I had prior experience with but was glad to either receive a refresher or know whether what/how I’ve done things in the past was correct or incorrect (from the mouths of more experienced lawyers and judges).”  

“I really enjoyed it, and I appreciate all the examples, case law & and statutes in the presentation material that went beyond what the speakers talked about.” 

“Fantastic dialogue among the judges and attorneys regarding real-world experiences and application of the laws and rules.” 

“The speakers were outstanding.  Everyone was very generous with time and information.” 

“Great, thanks so much. It was great to hear from all the speakers, especially nice to get the judge’s insight because that is a rare opportunity.” 

“Fantastic.” 

“I thoroughly enjoyed all the speakers!” 

“So well done. Bravo to all involved. I learned a lot and really enjoyed it.” 

“Great program.”  

“Being able to hear from judges about their perspectives and mindsets was extremely inciteful.” 

“Very informative! I liked how you went through the entire case history step by step.” 

“Great concise program. Useful information.” 

“This was a wonderful program I learned so much and appreciate your speakers sharing all of their knowledge and expertise.” 

“Very helpful.” 

“Great training and overview.  Thank you!” 

“Great materials and content.”  

“Knowledgeable and great speakers!” 

“The content was as advertised, and I learned important information that I will be able to immediately apply to my practice.”

“The information presented was concise and helpful as a new/young associate.” 

“Very informational! I appreciated the insider tips.”

“Engaging speakers and informative material; good practice pointers.”

“This course was perfect because it gave insights needed for California state practice as well as general practice tips I will incorporate into my practice.”

“Appreciated hearing everyone’s experience in practice while they explained civil procedure.”

“Program was well-paced and manage to pack in a lot of information on topics that could easily cover a day all their own.”

“Overall, great program and very helpful to me, as a sixth-year litigator.”

“I found it very informative, and some areas of the program, in particular, were helpful for areas of practice that were very relevant to my day-to-day.”

“Great bootcamp/crash course about civil litigation! I found all the presentations to be very informative and helpful.”

“I appreciate the diversity of the group – partners, judges, small firms, big firms, and their mutual respect for each other and the profession.”

“It is always such a great opportunity to hear from the bench. Thank you for having them and for their insights.”

“The PowerPoints were clear and the format felt less like a lecture and more like a discussion.”

“Great program! Very informative.”

“The program was, in general, informative and useful.”

“This was very helpful in putting together the ‘pieces’ of litigation.”

“I thought the folks giving the training did a great job.”

“Covering the contents was comprehensive.”

“Very well structed; excellent instructors.”

“Well organized and smoothly executed.”

“Very informative!”

“Great perspective on the topics from today.”

“Great program! Very happy with it.”

“I thought it was very well done and I appreciated them sticking to the schedule.”

“Excellent program.”

“I liked the order of the presentations and that it walked you through the life of a case.”

“This was a great program.”

“Practical and informative.”

“Great program content.”

Very helpful, informative, and practical overall!”

“I learned more than I expected.”

“Excellent details and thorough presentations.”

“Excellent coverage of a wide range of material.”

“Good program that covered a lot.”

“Very informative and educational. Great to have speakers who are active attorneys/judges in the jurisdiction.”

“The program was great. I was pleased with its ability to provide both basic and in-depth information. I enjoyed the real-life experiences.”

“I thought the program was very educational and I learned a few tips. I especially appreciated the insight from the judges.”

“Really great content.”

“Excellent.”

“This was incredibly helpful. As a junior litigator, I appreciated going through every step of a case.”

“It was very informative.”

“Helpful and straightforward.”

“I thought it was great.”

“Very informative.”

“I thought it was a good summary of civil litigation.”

“Very informative. I loved hearing the battle stories both good and bad.”

“Great overview of preparing for and handling a trial in superior court.”

“Great program.”

“Very good high-level overview of the litigation process.”

“Mostly helpful and engaging.”

“Very clear and concise.”

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

“Excellent comprehensive program.”

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

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

“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.”

“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.”

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

“Great to hear all sides- defense, plaintiff’s and judges. This was VERY helpful!”

“The slides are a useful reference material after the fact, and the speakers’ personal experiences were informative.”

“Delivered what was promised.”

“Given this was only about seven hours, I didn’t expect anything to be covered in depth. However, I now know what I need to delve deeper into and will take the necessary courses before my trial, which is set to occur in six months.”

“Excellent coverage of a wide range of material.”

“The speakers all exceeded expectations.”

“Good program. Covered a lot.”

“Very informative and educational. Great to have speakers who are active attorneys/judges in the jurisdiction.”

“I learned a lot and the handouts/slides will undoubtedly help in the future.”

“The program was great. I was pleased with its ability to provide both basic and in-depth information. I enjoyed the real-life experiences.”

“I thought the program was educational and I learned a few tips. I especially appreciated the insight from the judges.”

“Really great content.”

“I enjoyed the program.” – Indoo Desai, Esq.

“Excellent!”

“Learned from the speakers’ very valuable experiences.”

“All the speakers were excellent. The war stories were great, and so were all the tips about the rules.”

“Engaging speakers and informative material; good practice pointers.”

“This was incredibly helpful. As a junior litigator I appreciated going through every step of a case.”

“Very informative.”

“Enjoyed!”

“Learned a lot.”

“The morning panel was the best. They were well-tempered and informative.”

“I got a nice overview of civil litigation.”

“It thought it was a good summery of civil litigation.”

“Very informative. I love hearing battle stories both good and bad.”

“Great overview of preparing for and handling a trial in a superior court.”

“Great program! A lot of information.”

“Very helpful for a junior attorney like me.”

“I enjoyed hearing about their actual experiences and real world examples.”

“Very good high-level overview of the litigation process.”

“Satisfied with the practical pointers.”

“Helpful and engaging.”

“Very clear and concise.”

“It was simultaneously an excellent refresher course while still teaching many new things. It was also great to hear comments from multiple judges.”

“Thank you for providing a pro bono discount for nonprofit organizations like the Public Law Center!”

“I felt the speakers did a good job reiterating the questions so that everyone knew what was asked (and the provided closed captioning was excellent and quickly displayed).”

“It was very interesting and informative.”

“Speakers are great.”

“The program is great and incredibly informative.”

“Great seminar.”

“Great!”

“Good content and speakers.”

“Excellent. A++.”

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

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

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

“Good materials.”

“Learned a lot and will definitely recommend.”

“Helpful.”

“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 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 was a nice run down of key components of litigation.”

“Good solid program.”

“I got basic information, but I also got very specific advice, which I really liked.”

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

“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.”

“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.”

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

“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.”

“Excellent presentations!”

“An excellent presentation. Informative and organized with compelling panel of speakers.”

“The program is great and incredibly informative.”

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

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

“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 run down of key components of litigation.”

“I got basic information, but I also got very specific advice, which I really liked.”

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

“It was good. I always look for trainings about jury selection and trial tips.”

“I thought this second part of the program was extremely helpful and we received a ton of great advice from the panelists. I thought that it was very conversational and informative and engaging.”

“A great program that I would recommend to others.”

“Excellent.”

“Great program.”

“Learned a lot and will definitely recommend.”

“This was great, I’ll be looking forward to the next one.”

“I really enjoyed today’s program. So much helpful information was provided.”

“I really liked the program and found it very helpful.”

“Good content and speakers.”

“It was very interesting and informative.”

“Great seminar.”

“Good, solid program.”

“Good materials.”

“The interactive nature of the panel was helpful (i.e., this was NOT a set of canned presentations by individuals while the other panelists just sat there). Each of the judge-panelists were quite good.”

“This was the only valuable MCLE I have attended in years.”

“Very good review and I learned many new points and tips. Very satisfied. Good refresher for myself who does less litigation and more transactional work.”

“Excellent in every respect.”

“I really appreciated the concrete practice tips and exemplars.”

“Great program today. Appreciated the conciseness of the massive amount of material covered. Details on the MSJ process and quick answers to the questions was nice. Great to hear the court’s perspective.”

“The mix of speakers provided for varied perspectives that were illuminating. I especially benefitted from the interactions among the panelists. It brought out more details, made it practical, and maintained the audience’s attention. Erickson and Burbidge were very engaging.”

“Program was very informative. I liked the progress of moving an entire case through trial/appellate review. Good practical tips. Exemplars are very helpful. Good tips on preparing for trial. I liked the timeline as a guide of what to think about for trial. Good insights regarding jury selection; good practice pointers regarding when to use jury questionnaires. I liked hearing the judge’s perspective regarding what he reads first in MSJs. Good to learn about his dos and don’ts.  I liked hearing about the pros and cons of juror questions and learning about how to prepare witnesses and how to get a witness to engage the jury.”

“Real life situations combined with humor – thanks! Thanks also for reminders of pertinent code sections and insight into judge’s preferences.”

“The seminar gave me good insight as to what the court looks for in reading papers. My objective was to improve motion writing and the comments of the presenters were very helpful.”

“Well done and great panel.”

“Great content and tips. Great speakers! Great to hear a judge’s POV. Excellent substantive additions. Complex topics presented very well (trial session).”

“Really helpful/practical information. Good lecture on oral argument and heading to trial. Very good presentation. Very knowledgeable speakers.”

“I appreciated the valuable details shared in each step of the trial process. The speakers’ firsthand experiences and anecdotes were very valuable.”

“Always helpful to get judges’ insight…The judges gave very helpful tips.”

“Very informative and speakers had vast experience and were able to provide practical tips and advice. The information was invaluable for someone like me who is a long-time attorney but not regularly in trial.”

“Really good program and everyone was great. Concise but fully informative. Did a great job answering questions. I think the webinar format is great for the questions. Very satisfied. Wanted a refresher in everything and I got that. A good seminar which I will recommend.”

“Great experience. This was my first superior court boot camp, so all information was relevant and interesting.”

“Judges gave good insight from the perspective of the bench. Honest conversation was a good way to keep everyone engaged.”

“Speakers were engaging and gave very insightful tips. Great presentations with respect to opening and closing arguments.”

“Great, excellent advice and tips. Practical advice and a good review of the details necessary to know when planning and anticipating each stage of trial.”

“The advice was practical, perfect for new attorneys.”

“Great intro to state court practice. I was looking for broad coverage and issues to look out for, and this course delivered.”

“All the things law school should have taught you, but didn’t.”

“Even after practicing for several years, it was good to have a discussion regarding the nuts and bolts.”

“Really helpful tips with the trial prep timeline. Great handouts that I will use all the time. Loved hearing the judge’s war stories. Very helpful tips for dos and don’ts.”

“The training was great! I appreciated all of the practical tips, and the speakers were engaging.”

“Good, practical advice regarding documents that judges want to see and ways to practice that judges appreciate.”

“This program provided a very helpful overview of the anatomy of a case through trial.”

“Helpful to have judges’ perspectives.”

“Great CLE.”

“This was a great and practical presentation.”

“I’ve done transactional work my whole legal career, so this was great. I’ve started taking on more litigation work. Very good information. Effective structure and presentation.”

“I got an overview of California Superior Court practice from many panelists with excellent backgrounds.”

“A lot of helpful insight on things that I haven’t learned yet in practice.”

“This is extremely helpful, especially for new attorneys.”

“This is very helpful, especially since I just started at my firm 2 weeks ago.”

“Very good examples and practical advice.”

“Very good, practical advice for practicing in the Superior Court.”

Speakers had great info. I particularly enjoyed hearing about how these rules play out in their practices. I enjoyed hearing about the judges’ expectations during litigation.”

“The program was very informative and engaging. The webinar platform worked without any issues. I learned some very useful tips that I can immediately apply to my current case load.”

“Great program.”

“Excellent presentation.”

“Great and comprehensive. A lot of good information and tips outside of the code provisions. Great practical tips and knowledge from the judges – wonderful and instructive. Good to hear insight from an experienced judge’s perspective.”

“It was engaging.”

“Very informative. Informative and easy to understand/well-explained.”

“I got a lot of useful specific information.”

“All speakers were very interesting and enjoyed the subject matter.”

“I thought the topics covered were helpful.”

“All speakers kept me engaged and interested.”

“I think that as a young professional, the speakers did a good job of covering the basics and a few ‘should-knows.’”

“Very helpful refresher course for someone getting back into the courtroom.”

“It was good and informative and helpful refresher.”

“Appreciated the significant number of female panelists. Useful info, easy to follow. This was a great program. Immensely helpful.”

“I appreciated getting insight from the judges and what they like or don’t like to see.”

“It was very informative and I appreciated the panelists/presenters’ time.”

“The panelist covered everything! They were quite thorough and respectful of the time constraints.”

“I found the speakers to be knowledgeable and effective at teaching and breaking down how to approach pre-trial and trial.”

“I learned new things, such as motion for recovery costs to prove bad faith defense.”

“I liked the content and it was a well-organized refresher for me. It was well done.”

“Speakers shared clear, succinct and useful war stories.”

“Speakers did a great job explaining how to put together and deal with a Motion for Summary Judgment.”

“The speakers were all clear and concise regarding topics. The program was very informative and found it helpful that each step to the process was broken down and straight forward.”

“Very satisfied. I learned a lot of new information and getting the judge’s perspective is very helpful.”

“It was good. Especially the discussion on jury instructions. It reiterated points from prior session but then talked about them more in-depth.”

“I appreciated the combination of experiences and practice areas.”

“Very helpful practice pointers. Everything was interesting and helpful.”

“Entire seminar was very helpful and informative.”

“Very satisfied. Really enjoyed the panel format.”

“The speakers were all great and equally interesting.”

“Invaluable insight from judges.”

“Great. The speakers were very knowledgeable and informative.”

“Program was informative. Program was informative, speakers were personable and knowledgeable.”

“Very helpful. Great information. I particularly like the direct and cross-examination sections.

“Great program and panelists.”

“Great, knowledgeable speakers.”

“A very good program for beginners; very helpful.”

“Very helpful advice as to motions in limine and tips for same.”

“Great/excellent presentation as to appeal and post motions that is rarely reviewed and explored.”

“I thought it was helpful that Ms. Adams spoke about jury selection through a more practical lens based on her own experience rather than an abstract concept. For example, when she showed us how she keeps track of potential jurors; extremely helpful advice for a new attorney!”

“Excellent advice and tips; enjoyed hearing stories from the bench.”

“A good refresher.”

“All presenters were very clear and professional.”

“Great speakers, very professional!”

“Clear, direct, and relevant information.”

“Very engaging and useful tips.”

“Everything I can think of is covered.”

Faculty

Hon. Harold W. Hopp
Judge
Superior Court of California, Riverside County

Judge Harold W. Hopp has served on the Riverside County Superior Court since 2005.  He was the Court’s presiding judge from January 2015 to December 2016.  His hears complex cases on a direct assignment calendar in Department 1 of the Historic Courthouse in Riverside.  Prior assignments included general unlimited civil cases. 

From September, 2017 to September 2023, Judge Hopp was a member of the Judicial Council of California and, prior to that, a member of the Civil Jury Instructions Advisory Committee for five years and the Civil and Small Claims Advisory Committee for three years.  In 2017, he was selected to the Desert Bar Association and Warren Slaughter/Richard Roemer Inn of Court Hall of Fame as the Outstanding Jurist of the Year. 

In practice, Judge Hopp was a litigator focusing on business litigation and employment law; most of his career was with Quinn Emanuel.  Besides Riverside County, he tried cases in several counties, including San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino.

Judge Hopp is a graduate of the USC Law School, where he was an articles editor of the Southern California Law Review.  He resides in Yucaipa, California.

---

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. Joseph M. Quinn
Judge
Superior Court of CA, San Francisco County

Joseph M. Quinn is a judge of the San Francisco Superior Court, appointed to the bench in 2015, elected to a full term the following year and most recently re-elected in 2022.  Judge Quinn has served in four of the five divisions of the court:  presiding over felony pre-trial proceedings, misdemeanor and felony trials, probate proceedings, civil law and motion and civil trials.  He has also served on the court’s Appellate Division, reviewing judgments from traffic, misdemeanor and limited-jurisdiction civil proceedings.  He was the supervising judge of the Probate and Mental Health Division.  He is active in court management, serving on several committees including the committees on rules, governance and elimination of bias.  He has been twice elected to the court’s executive committee.  He is a member of the Judicial Council of California’s Probate and Mental Health Advisory Committee.

Immediately prior to joining the bench, he was a litigation partner at Hanson Bridgett LLP and, before that, with Meyers Nave, LLP.  At both firms, he chaired the appellate practice group.  While in practice, Judge Quinn was a certified appellate specialist.  Earlier in his career, he served as a trial attorney with the Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., a principal trial attorney with the San Francisco City Attorney’s office, and as a senior litigation associate at Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin P.C. (now Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP). 

Judge Quinn has been an adjunct professor at St. Mary’s College and Golden Gate University School of Law.  He is active in judicial education, most recently presenting at the Civil Justice Institute.  He is a former chair of the State Bar Appellate Law Advisory Commission and former member of the State Bar Board of Legal Specialization.  He is a fellow of Litigation Counsel of America, a trial lawyer honorary society dedicated to diversity in the profession.  He served on Governor Brown’s Bay Area Judicial Selection Advisory Committee and Governor Gavin Newsom’s Bay Area JSAC.  He is a director at Levitt and Quinn Family Law Center, a legal services organization in Los Angeles co-founded by his grandmother. 

Judge Quinn received his B.A. from UCLA and his J.D. from the University of California, Berkeley School of Law.  He served as a law clerk to Judge Eugene F. Lynch of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 

Judge Quinn was born and raised in Buffalo, New York, and happy to leave the snow shovel behind when he moved to LA for college.  He is married to Hon. Jim Humes, Administrative Presiding Judge of the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District.  They live in San Francisco.

 

---

Hon. Laura A. Seigle
Judge
Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County

Laura Seigle is a judge on the Los Angeles Superior Court assigned to a civil courtroom and has sat pro tem on the California Court of Appeal.  Judge Seigle is chair of the Los Angeles Superior Court’s Ethics Review and Comment Committee and a member of the Court’s Local Rules Committee. She is a member of the Los Angeles County Bar Association Litigation Section’s Executive Committee, the Board of Governors of the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles, the LACBA-WLALA Joint Task Force on the Retention and Promotion of Women Lawyers, the Chancery Club of Los Angeles, and the Board of the Library Foundation of Los Angeles. She is Chair of the Yale Law School Association Executive Committee and was President of the Los Angeles County Bar Foundation.  Judge Seigle regularly teaches on a variety of topics including evidence, torts, and professional ethics.

While in practice, Judge Seigle was named one of The National Law Journal’s 75 "Outstanding Women Lawyers" in the country, Intellectual Property Litigator of the Year by the Century City Bar Association, one of the 20 "Most Influential Women in IP Law" nationally by Law360, one of 75 "Top Intellectual Property Litigators" by the Daily Journal, one of the "50 Women Leaders in Tech Law" by The Recorder, and a Top 100 Women Lawyer in California by the Daily Journal. For many years Judge Seigle was included on the Southern California "Super Lawyers" list.

Prior to her appointment, Judge Seigle was a partner at Irell & Manella LLP and clerked on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Judge Seigle graduated from Yale Law School where she was an editor of the Yale Law Journal, and from Harvard University, magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa.

---

Brad Estes, Esq.
Partner
Lewis & Llewellyn LLP

Brad Estes is an experienced litigator, representing plaintiffs and defendants across a wide variety of industries at every stage of complex commercial litigation, including business tort, contract, fraud, regulatory, trade secret, trademark, employee mobility, and competition disputes.

Brad has a proven track record of counseling senior leadership, orienting his litigation approach to the strategic needs of the business and emphasizing tenacity, creativity, and pragmatism. He prides himself on his subject matter adaptability and ability to dive deep into the facts of a case at any stage. Brad’s practice has been uniquely trial-focused, providing insight at every stage of the case of the ultimate risks and rewards his clients face. He is also experienced at performing pre-litigation investigations to identify claims, mitigate liability, and resolve disputes at an early stage. He has been recognized as a Northern California Rising Star by Super Lawyers in 2021, 2022, and 2023.

Brad also founded and runs Lewis & Llewellyn’s annual fellowship, which is designed to promote access to the legal profession by providing hands-on litigation experience, law school preparation, and general professional development to high-achieving young adults from a diverse array of backgrounds.

Before joining Lewis & Llewellyn, Brad clerked for the Honorable Lawrence J. O’Neill of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Prior to clerking, Brad practiced at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP in San Francisco, California, representing a range of clients from Fortune 500 companies to privately held corporations, including pharmaceutical, consumer product, professional, and technology companies. The vast majority of Brad’s time at Quinn Emanuel was spent in or preparing for jury trials in state and federal courts across the country.

---

Becca Furman, Esq.
Partner
Lewin & Llewellyn LLP

Becca Furman is a litigator who regularly represents clients in complex breach of contract, trade secret, and privacy disputes.

Becca understands the importance of aggressive litigation and always litigates with an eye toward trial.  Her trial experience includes defending a company against breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation, and CFAA/CDAFA claims in a multi-million-dollar federal trial.  Becca also litigated a two-month jury trial against a local school district involving the sexual assault of multiple students at the hands of their teacher.  The case resulted in a successful post-trial settlement.

Becca underpins her trial advocacy with pragmatic litigation strategy, and regularly obtains successful settlements on behalf of her clients that avoid the cost of trial.   As just one recent example, Lewis & Llewellyn LLP obtained a settlement of .75 million for a sexual assault victim.  Becca has negotiated multiple settlements involving Bay Area start-ups, allowing the parties to move on from the potentially business-ending expense of litigation.  She also regularly negotiates on behalf of individuals accused of trade secret theft after leaving a company.

Becca has been named a Super Lawyers Rising Star every year since 2016. Becca serves as a member of the Bar Association of San Francisco’s Barristers Board of Directors and formerly served on the Associate Board of Girls of the Run of the Bay Area, an after-school nonprofit that teaches elementary schools girls life skills and confidence through a running-based curriculum.

---

Rachel Gezerseh, Esq.

Panish | Shea | Ravipudi LLP

Rachel Gezerseh is a trial attorney with Panish | Shea | Boyle | Ravipudi LLP who specializes in litigating complex catastrophic personal injury, wrongful death and products liability cases.

Ms. Gezerseh was previously an attorney at top international law firm Jones Day, where she litigated large scale product liability and aviation disaster cases.  She regularly obtained outstanding results for her clients, which included consumer product and aircraft manufacturers, healthcare companies, and pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers.  Ms. Gezerseh has now taken the skills she gained at Jones Day and dedicated her practice to vigorously seeking justice for individuals who have been wrongfully harmed.

Ms. Gezerseh has substantial experience in a broad range of litigation phases, including discovery, motion practice, mediation, and trial. She has taken and defended numerous party and corporate witness depositions and has extensive drafting experience with summary judgment and other critical motions at the trial level.  Currently, Ms. Gezerseh is working alongside partner Rahul Ravipudi on behalf of plaintiffs in the Southern California Fire Cases litigation arising from the 2017 Thomas Fire in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties and subsequent debris flows in Montecito, California.  Ms. Gezerseh is also part of the team representing school districts and other public entities in California involved in the JUUL Labs Product Cases litigation against the electronic cigarette manufacturer.

Ms. Gezerseh is dedicated to pro bono work and community involvement. While at Jones Day, she fought passionately on behalf of victims of human trafficking and forced labor working with counsel from Bet Tzedek, the Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking, and Asian Americans Advancing Justice to obtain a six-figure restitution award for the clients in connection with a criminal case against one of the traffickers.  Ms. Gezerseh serves on the Associate Leadership Board for Public Counsel and is a member of the Alumni Association Board of Directors at Southwestern Law School where she chairs the Domestic Violence Advocacy Initiative (DVAI) committee.

Since 2013, Ms. Gezerseh’s peers recognized her as a Southern California Super Lawyers “Rising Star” and she was named to the Super Lawyers list in 2020.  Ms. Gezerseh has been featured in Bloomberg Law and ABA for Law Students and is the author of the Law Career Playbook, the leading networking guide for law students and new lawyers.  Ms. Gezerseh is currently an adjunct professor at the University of Southern California, Gould School of Law.

A member of the State Bar of California and the State Bar of Nevada, Ms. Gezerseh received her Juris Doctorate from Southwestern Law School where she was an Associate Editor of the Southwestern Law Review and a member of the Moot Court Honors Program.  During her third year at Southwestern, Ms. Gezerseh had the honor of serving as a judicial extern to the (late) Hon. Florence Marie Cooper in the Central District of California.  Prior to becoming a lawyer, Ms. Gezerseh was a documentary filmmaker and received her B.A. in Film and Television from the University of California, Los Angeles.

---

Sebastian E. Kaplan, Esq.
Counsel
Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP

Sebastian litigates disputes concerning trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, and complex commercial transactions. He represents clients in both federal and state courts and has successfully resolved claims at all stages from pre-litigation cease and desist letters through trial. In addition to intellectual property litigation, he defends technology innovators from privacy, false advertising, and other consumer-related class actions. 

Sebastian is an active member of local and national bar associations. In 2016, he was appointed by the president of the American Bar Association to sit on the Advisory Commission of the Standing Committee on Public Education. He is a director of the Justice and Diversity Center of the Bar Association of San Francisco (“BASF”) and chair of the BASF Intellectual Property Section. In 2013, he served as the president of BASF’s Barristers Club, comprised of BASF attorneys with less than ten years of practice, and was named Outstanding Barrister of the Year in 2016. © 2024 Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP. 

He is also committed to pro bono homelessness prevention and regularly represents indigent tenants facing eviction. In 2015, Sebastian was awarded BASF’s annual Housing Justice Award for first-chairing a four-day unlawful detainer trial. 

Before joining BCLP, Sebastian clerked for the Hon. Carlos T. Bea on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and practiced law at firms in San Francisco and Oakland.

---

Jesse Lanier, Esq.
Of Counsel
Conrad|Metlitzky|Kane LLP

Jesse Lanier is Of Counsel at Conrad|Metlitzky|Kane where her practice focuses on complex civil litigation including business torts, contracts, and intellectual property disputes.

Jesse has over a decade of experience in all aspects and stages of litigation, including trial. Her keen ability to present a cogent and compelling narrative, honed by her time as a journalist, makes her an effective advocate for her clients.

Before joining Conrad|Metlitzky|Kane, Jesse was a litigator at Durie Tangri (which was acquired by Morrison Foerster), and served as a law clerk to the Honorable Jeffrey S. White on the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Prior to her clerkship, Jesse was an associate at Holland & Knight.

Jesse received her law degree, cum laude, from the Boston University School of Law, where she served as an Articles Editor for the Journal of Science & Technology Law and directed the law school’s sketch comedy show. She has a master’s degree in documentary filmmaking and a bachelor’s degree in journalism—both from New York University, where she was elected Phi Beta Kappa. She is currently a member of the Edward J. McFetridge American Inn of Court and serves on the Association of Business Trial Lawyers Leadership Development Committee.

---

Jason Liang, Esq.
Partner
Liang Ly LLP

 Jason represents corporate and individual clients in various complex civil and criminal matters. His experience includes litigating issues involving trade secret and intellectual property theft, defamation, breach of contract, fraud, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO Act”), the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the Economic Espionage Act, the False Claims Act, conspiracy, anti-trust and unfair competition laws, and cross-border disputes involving Chinese law. In 2019, after a two-week jury trial, Jason successfully obtained a complete defense verdict exonerating his client of any and all civil liability under the federal False Claims Act.

Prior to founding Liang Ly LLP, Jason was an associate at the Los Angeles office of Jones Day and Murphy Rosen LLP, a boutique litigation firm located in Santa Monica. He also worked closely with the Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice ("LACLJ") to represent, on a pro bono basis, victims of domestic violence who seek representation to obtain permanent restraining orders against their abusers. In 2012, LACLJ awarded him with the Excellence in Community Service Award for his pro bono work. In addition, Jason had served on the board of the Southern California Chinese Lawyers Association and is a former president of the organization.

Jason earned his Juris Doctorate, cum laude, from Washington University in St. Louis, School of Law, in 2007. He received his BA in Economics from University of California, Irvine (UCI). Jason is admitted to practice before all state and federal courts in the State of California, and is also a member of the bar of the U.S. Courts of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit. Jason has been consistently recognized by his peers as a Southern California Super Lawyers “Rising Star.”

---

Meghan Féronie Loisel, Esq.
Senior Litigation Counsel
Rudy Exelrod Zieff & Lowe LLP

Meghan Féronie Loisel joined the firm in 2016 because she wanted to represent employees who stand up for their rights.  Meghan helps employees subjected to workplace discrimination or retaliation to hold their employers accountable.  She also works to ensure that employers honor the contractual commitments they make to their employees and pay them the wages and benefits owed.  Meghan’s litigation practice includes both individual cases and class actions in court and arbitration. 

Meghan focused on employment law during law school, working as a law clerk representing low-income workers at Legal Aid at Work.  After completing a litigation fellowship with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Reproductive Freedom Project in New York City, she returned to the Bay Area and worked for Santa Clara County as a deputy county counsel.  This role provided Meghan with insight into public employee representation.  She was herself a public employee and union member.  She also defended the County and its employees in employment, civil rights, and tort cases.  Meghan relies on this balanced view of employment litigation to provide her clients with evenhanded assessments of their cases. 

Meghan graduated from New York University School of Law and is a member of the California Bar and New York Bar.

---

Mythily Sivarajah, Esq.
Senior Counsel
Peck-Law, Employment & Civil Rights

 Mythily Sivarajah ("MY-THE-LEE SIVA-RAJA") has more than a decade of experience solely representing plaintiffs/ employees and she has committed her entire legal career to advocating for workers’ rights and social justice issues. Mythily has broad experience in handling employment and civil rights matters of diverse complexities through all stages of litigation, as demonstrated by her positive results on behalf of numerous plaintiffs against a range of employers and businesses, including public entities. Prior to joining PECK-LAW, Employment & Civil Rights, Mythily practiced at other litigation firms advocating for plaintiffs and workers, where she successfully represented plaintiffs in various employment discrimination, harassment, retaliation, whistleblower, sexual assault, wage theft and defamation cases.

Mythily pursued her passion for learning about workplace issues by focusing her undergraduate degree at Cornell’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations. While at Cornell, along with conducting extensive research on workers’ rights, she also became involved with unions and other employment organizations, which further bolstered her interest and resolve in making a difference in the lives of aggrieved and injured employees. In 2000, Mythily graduated in three years with a Bachelor of Science in Industrial and Labor Relations from Cornell University as a Cornell National Scholar.

Graduating with her Juris Doctor degree in 2007 from the University of San Francisco Law School, , Mythily was honored by the American Bar Association/The Bureau of National Affairs with its Award for Excellence in the Study of Labor and Employment Law. Mythily also completed an internship with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Legal Unit, and she served the needs of many low-wage employees through her work with a local legal clinic. Following law school, she volunteered her time and efforts with the Centre for Women’s Development and Research in India, focusing primarily on domestic workers rights concerns.

Recognized by her peers as a “Super Lawyer” in 2020 and a “Rising Star” with Super Lawyers’ Magazine for 2017-2018, Mythily is also actively involved with the California Employment Lawyers Association (“CELA”) as co-chair of the Mentorship Committee, and she is committed to advancing knowledge of workplace issues, diversity and mentorship amongst her peers, mentees, and other bar associations in the Bay Area. She is a former co-chair of the pro-bono committee for the South Asian Bar Association of Northern California and former co-chair of the bay area chapter of the South Asian Women Attorneys Network.

Mythily enjoys baking and cooking different cuisines, and traveling. Oftentimes, you will find her hiking in the Bay Area’s outdoors with her husband and two kids. 

---

Zachary A. Streiff, Esq.
Senior Associate
Downey Brand LLP

Zachary Streiff excels at resolving complex business disputes both in and outside the courtroom. Whether through negotiation, mediation, or vigorous litigation, Zach is tireless in pursuing the best possible results for his clients.

Zach’s clients are diverse, ranging from technology companies and Silicon Valley startups to California public entities, retail and hospitality businesses, as well as legal, healthcare, and financial professionals. His broad litigation experience includes actions involving breach of contract, harm to business interests, real property, and family trust disputes, among others.

Prior to joining Downey Brand in 2024, Zach practiced law for five years at a small firm in Monterey County. Before that, he served as a research attorney for the Civil Department of the Monterey County Superior Court, where he honed his legal skills and gained valuable insight into the judicial process. After graduating from law school in 2015, Zach practiced for two years with the U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, through the U.S. Attorney General’s Honors Program.

---

Fees

CLE Credit

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

NY General: This course is eligible for approval, under New York’s CLE Approved Jurisdiction policy, for 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.