Winning Motions for Summary Judgment [OnDemand Streaming and Recorded Packages]

What You Will Learn

Faculty includes Retired Federal Court Magistrate Judge Suzanne Segal (CDCA), now in ADR, Superior Court Judge (San Francisco) Joseph Quinn and Superior Court Judge Harold Hopp (Riverside).

Thursday, November 7, 2024
Webinar
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. Pacific Time

1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m.
Planning for the MSJ

• Federal v. State Court
• Pleading considerations for your complaint or answer relevant to MSJ
• Early meeting considerations and initial disclosures relevant to MSJ
• Timing considerations
• Motions to dismiss or demurrers that introduce MSJ topics
• Discovery plans relevant to MSJ
• Researching jury instruction and legal precedent in preparation for your MSJ
• Cost considerations
• Motions for Summary Adjudication v. Summary Judgment

2:00 p.m. – 2:10 p.m.
BREAK 

2:10 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. (there will be a break during this session)
Writing the Motion for Summary Judgment and the Opposition

• Moving papers
  • The standards (Federal vs. State)
  • Important considerations (Federal vs. State)

• Persuasive MSJ writing – the P & A
  • Intro
  • Headers
  • Content
  • Conclusion

• Supporting declarations
• Supporting evidence
• The Separate Statements of Undisputed Facts
• Opposition – standards (federal vs state)
• Opposition – declarations and evidence
• Opposition – response to Separate Statement of Facts
• Opposition – Separate statement of Disputed Facts
• The Reply – P & A, responses to Oppositions Statement of Disputed Facts
• Responding to typical arguments
• Objections to evidence and responses
• Proposed judgment
• Objections to the proposed judgment
• Final tips and advice from the bench
• Mistakes to Avoid

Testimonials

This is a new seminar, planned specifically by Judge Segal. Below are just a few testimonials from our  CA Superior Court and Federal  Court bootcamps, taught by the attorneys and judges teaching this seminar:

“Information is succinct. Easy to understand. Lots of really good information. Nice to get insight from practitioners as well as a judge’s perspective.” – Dawn M. Reitsma, Esq.

“Excellent program — very good, practical advice.” – Sean Ryan Broderick, Esq.

“Great to hear insights from judges and experienced practitioners. The Q& A sessions were great to hear.” – Tracy Woo, Esq.

“Excellent and diverse speakers. The two judges really gave credibility to the topic.” – Derrick James McKain, Esq.

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

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

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

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

“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.

“Excellent.” ­ – Suzanne Kenney, Esq.

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

“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.

“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.

“Invaluable to have the judge’s advice and opinions.” – Genevieve Coyle, Esq.

“Highlighting differences between State and Federal Court procedures in California was extremely helpful.”

“Great program! Very informative and interesting. Looking forward to future seminars.” – Iveta Ovsepyan, Esq.

“I am fully satisfied. This was a great primer for practicing in Federal Court. This was one of the best seminars that I’ve been to in my 13 years of practicing law. It makes me want to never go to state court ever again.” – Richard Jefferson, Esq.

“Engaging speakers and course material was presented in a concise and clear way.”

“Great topics, excellent speakers.” – Brittany Toth, Esq.

“Great seminar and very useful materials/handouts.” – Andrew Browning, Esq. 

“Very informative.” – W. Ethan McCallum, Esq.  

“I specifically enjoyed the practical experiences shared by the presenters.” – Joe Anglin, Esq.

“I thought the program was informative, particularly when discussing motion strategy.” – Paul Thomas, Esq.

“Very interesting.” – Francisco A. Suarez, Esq.

“Excellent! Will be back! Everyone was great!” – David A. Wolf, Esq.

“Completely satisfied. This was outstanding!” – Nancy Woods, Esq.

“I like having the law clerk and judges’ perspectives.”

“Great program! Really informative!” – Deborah Gettleman, Esq.

“Loved it!” – Jugpreet Mann, 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.

Faculty

Hon. Suzanne H. Segal (Ret.)
Retired Magistrate Judge, CDCA
Neutral, Signature Resolution

After 18 years as a United States Magistrate Judge with the Central District of California, including four years as the Chief Magistrate Judge, Hon. Suzanne H. Segal (Ret.) joins Signature Resolution as a mediator, arbitrator and Special Master/Discovery Referee. During her tenure on the federal bench, Judge Segal presided over numerous trials, evidentiary hearings, motions and discovery conferences involving diverse subject matter. Judge Segal served as the settlement judge in hundreds of cases, settling business and insurance disputes, patent, trademark and copyright actions, and employment, civil rights, and tort cases. Judge Segal handled a wide range of motions and settlements arising out of class actions, particularly in the wage and hour context. 

Judge Segal has broad experience in securities litigation, including matters brought by private investors and the SEC. In addition, Judge Segal has extensive experience in matters involving the False Claims Act and related actions involving the healthcare industry. 

Judge Segal has served as a Special Master or Discovery Referee in cases involving the False Claims Act, mass tort and insurance claims, patent litigation, and product liability claims. 

Before her appointment to the bench, Judge Segal served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Civil Division of the Los Angeles U.S. Attorney’s Office for 12 years. As an AUSA, Judge Segal handled a variety of cases, including contract, employment, civil rights, Medicare reimbursement and tort claims. She also brought consumer and civil rights actions on behalf of the Department of Justice. From 1999 to 

2002, she served as the Chief of Civil Appeals for the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Prior to serving in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Judge Segal was a civil litigator at Dewey, Ballantine and Adams, Duque and Hazeltine.

Judge Segal has also served as a lecturer in Law at UCLA School of Law and Loyola Law School. 

Judge Segal is known for her work ethic and persistent dedication to reach a positive result for the parties. 

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

The Honorable Harold W. Hopp is a presiding judge at the Riverside County Superior Court in Riverside, CA. Judge Hopp was first appointed to the bench in 2005.  Prior to that he was a litigator focusing on business litigation and employment law.

Judge Hopp is also a member of the Judicial Council of California and has served on several judicial committees in California.

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.

Evangeline A.Z. Burbidge, Esq.
Partner
Lewis & Llewellyn LLP

Evangeline (Evan) is a leader in the legal community, a trusted counselor, and a skilled advocate. 

Whether litigating a case or advising a client, Evan understands the importance of the big picture. She also knows that being an effective litigator means not only fighting hard, but also being a proactive problem solver. She is a straight shooter, respected by both colleagues and opposing counsel.

Evan litigates and advises on a broad array of matters, including complex commercial cases, trade secret theft, fraud, breach of contract, and other business disputes. 

Since joining Lewis & Llewellyn, she has worked for Fortune 100 companies, individuals, and Silicon Valley start-ups, both litigating and conducting internal investigations. 

Evan has worked on both the defense and plaintiff’s side, successfully representing a billion-dollar company against allegations of wrongdoing and, more recently, securing her client a victory in connection with allegations of trade secret theft.  Outside of the business context, Evan has also represented survivors of childhood sexual abuse, helping them achieve justice through the legal system.

Evan is also active in the legal community and is barred in both California and Utah.  She is a member of Women Lawyers of Utah and serves on the board of HEAL Utah.  She also spearheaded efforts to increase the profile of female leaders in the field and is an active mentor. 

Ms. Burbidge was recently selected by the Daily Journal as one of the Top 100 Women Lawyers in California. She has also been recognized by Best Lawyers, Super Lawyers Magazine as a Super Lawyer, Utah Business Magazine as a member of “2022 Legal Elite”, Benchmark Litigation, and has received other awards recognizing her litigation successes and contributions to the field.

A Utah native, Evan loves skiing and trying to teach her children to do the same. She also enjoys learning about clean tech, supporting local theater, and demonstrating her uncanny ability to recognize C-list celebrities.

Adrian G. Driscoll, Esq.
Senior Trial Counsel
Murphy, Pearson Bradley & Feeney, P.C.

Senior Trial Counsel in Murphy Pearson’s San Francisco office, Adrian has represented clients in a broad spectrum of areas, including business and commercial litigation, personal injury, professional liability, attorney fee litigation, trust litigation, constitutional and civil rights claims, surety and fidelity bond actions, employment, administrative law, actions arising under the Public Safety Officer Procedural Bill of Rights Acts, and appeals and writs.

In addition to his practice at the firm, Adrian provides mediation services. He has served as a Settlement Conference Officer at pre-trial and day-of-trial settlement conferences for the San Francisco Superior Court, as well as a panelist on the Sonoma County Superior Court Mediation Program.

Adrian served as a Lieutenant Colonel in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps, United States Army Reserve, where his assignments included appointment as General Counsel (Staff Judge Advocate) for an Army Reserve Division. During his service, he studied government standards of conduct and fiscal law at the Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center, Charlottesville, Virginia.

Adrian was a law clerk to the Honorable John E. Benson, Judge of the San Francisco Superior Court in 1979 and 1980.

Ryan Erickson, Esq.
Partner
Lewis & Llewellyn LLP

Ryan Erickson is a tenacious litigator who thrives in the high-pressure environment of civil litigation. As a Partner at Lewis & Llewellyn, Ryan brings years of experience representing plaintiffs and defendants in a diverse array of complex disputes. He enjoys combining strategy, grit, and efficiency to best meet his clients’ litigation objectives. After graduating with High Honors from Princeton University, Ryan received his law degree from UCLA, where he was an Editor of the Law Review and selected as a member of the Order of the Coif (top 10% of his class). Ryan began his career in the San Francisco office of Latham & Watkins LLP, one of the world’s premier law firms, where he represented several Fortune 500 companies in high-profile commercial disputes.

Since joining Lewis & Llewellyn in 2013, Ryan has secured complete defense victories for multiple clients in bet-the-company cases. Crossing the aisle to the plaintiff’s side of the courtroom, Ryan has secured millions of dollars in judgments and settlements through the successful prosecution of his clients’ claims. By litigating on both sides of the bar, Ryan brings a broad perspective to his practice that enables him to efficiently and effectively address the legal needs of his clients.

For four consecutive years, Ryan has been recognized as, a “Rising Star” by Super Lawyers Magazine, an honor reserved for only 2.5% of U.S. attorneys. Benchmark Litigation also recently named Ryan to its “Under 40 Hot List,” which honors the achievements of the nation’s “most accomplished legal partners of the age of forty or younger.” In addition to his business litigation practice, Ryan has also earned a reputation as a premier advocate for survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Applying the aggressive and exhaustive approach taken in high-stakes commercial litigation to his nationwide sexual abuse practice, Ryan has obtained numerous multi-million dollar recoveries on behalf of his clients. Along the way, he has become a tireless advocate for the prevention of sexual abuse. Ryan also serves on the Board of Directors of CALICO, one of the largest child advocacy centers in California, which serves approximately 700 abused children every year. During his free time, Ryan enjoys competing in the occasional Ironman triathlon and spending time with his family, usually outdoors in their 1991 Volkswagen Westfalia Vanagon.

Reid Mullen, Esq.
Partner
Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP

Reid Mullen has repeatedly confronted novel and complex legal issues and persuaded judges and juries to rule for his clients. His comfort and creativity in uncharted territory has generated highly influential victories for clients ranging from leading technology companies to a wrongfully-convicted client who not only won his freedom, but received significant compensation from the state after his release.

Adam K. Shea, Esq.
Partner
Panish | Shea | Ravipudi LLP

Panish | Shea | Boyle | Ravipudi LLP founding partner Adam Shea is a nationally recognized trial lawyer with extensive experience and success representing individuals and families in catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases in Los Angeles County, Orange County, San Bernardino County, Riverside County, and across Southern California.

Mr. Shea has a proven track record of helping those who have been harmed by negligence, wrongful conduct, violations of safety rules, and defective products – including automotive and tire product defects. In this area,  Mr. Shea specializes in bus and truck collisions involving other vehicles and pedestrians, accidents resulting from tire failures, rollovers of 15 passenger vans, trucks and utility vehicles, as well as cases involving claims of roof crush, defective fuel systems, defective restraint systems, seat back failures, child safety seat defects, airbag deployment failures, van conversion defects, and vehicle crashworthiness. He has obtained some of the largest jury verdicts and settlements in California in these types of cases and was an integral part of the trial team in Lampe v. Continental Tire that resulted in a .6 million verdict, which is the largest jury verdict in history in a lawsuit involving a defective tire.

Mr. Shea also represents injured parties in cases involving commercial truck accidents, trash truck accidents, airplane accidents, helicopter crashes, train disasters, and governmental liability for dangerous condition of public property. He has achieved over 200 settlements and jury verdicts in excess of ,000,000 in these types of cases, including numerous record settlements and verdicts.

Mr. Shea is a member of the Los Angeles chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates (“ABOTA”), and has been selected by his peers for inclusion in, Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Consumer Lawyers,  Best Lawyers of America, National Trial Lawyers: The Top 100 Trial Lawyers, and Super Lawyers. He has been recognized for his legal ability and ethical standards by the prestigious Martindale-Hubbell peer review ratings with an A-V rating, the highest possible rating.

In 2011, Mr. Shea was a finalist for the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles (CAALA) Trial Lawyer of the Year for his representation of three young boys who lost both their parents when their van rolled over after a tread separation in the rear tire in the case of Barber v. Mossy Ford (San Diego Superior Court). The jury found that the car dealership had performed a faulty tire repair that led to the tread separation, and reached a record verdict of ,465,864. Pre-trial settlements with other defendants resulted in a combined recovery for the family of ,763,000 – as well as an agreement by the dealership to improve their training of its technicians to improve consumer safety.

A frequent lecturer at a wide variety of legal education seminars, Mr. Shea travels throughout the country sharing his expertise with his professional peers. He has appeared on national news programs, including NBC News, and has authored numerous articles in legal publications on various topics.

Mr. Shea is a member of several professional organizations, including the Board of Governors of the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles, the Board of Directors of the Attorneys Information Exchange Group, the Consumer Attorneys of California, Trial Lawyers for Public Justice, and the American Association for Justice.

A 1990 graduate of UCLA, Mr. Shea earned his Juris Doctorate from Loyola Law School of Los Angeles in 1993. When on break from his legal practice, he enjoys spending time with his family and coaching his son in a variety of youth sports, as well as serving on the Board of several youth sports leagues, including the local football league, basketball league, and Little League.

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:  $279

Recorded Packages via Download or CD/DVDs:

Video Recording – DVD or Download: $279

Audio Only (for in your car, etc.) Recording – CD or Download:  $279

Order both the Video and Audio Only Packages for only $50 more – Download, DVD or CD: $329

$8.50 shipping and sales tax (in California) are added at checkout to DVD/CD orders.

This program will be recorded live on November 7, 2024. 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 3.50 units of general CLE in California.

NY General: This course is eligible for approval, under New York’s CLE Approved Jurisdiction policy, for 3.50 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 state/s 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.