17th Annual Superior Court Boot Camp: The Nuts and Bolts (CA) (Recorded Package)

What You Will Learn

 

The Early Stuff: Case Themes and Strategies, Advice on submitting Complaints & Answers; Demurrers and Motions to strike, CMCs

• Complaints and Answers
  • Rules and timelines
  • How to do it
  • Strategies
  • Common mistakes

• Demurrers/Motions to Strike
• Demurrers v. Answers
• Case Management Conference / Scheduling Your Case

Discovery in State Court

• Discovery
  • Regular Discovery in state court
  • Types in state court
  • Motions that occur during Discovery, including motions for sanctions
  • Overlooked Deadlines – if needed
  • Procedural Issues that are often missed/common mistakes
  • Strategies and choices
    • For Settlements
    • For Trial
  • Superior Court v. Federal Court
  • RFPs
• E-Discovery
  • Latest State Rules, changes in rules
  • Strategies
  • Cost Saving Measures
  • Mistakes not to make
  • Important state cases
• Motions to Compel
  

Depositions in State Court

• Rules Strategies & Timelines for state court
• State v. Federal rule differences and strategy differences
• Deciding whom to depose
• Taking good depositions – Mistakes not to make
• Making effective use of depositions at trial in state court
• Practical examples, discussion of anything in handout

 Motions for Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication

• Timeline
• How you usually do it, your own process
• Responses and Replies – Organization and Effectiveness
• What is effective and what is not
• What judges look for
• Common mistakes not to make
• Practical Examples, discussion of handout materials

Oral Argument

Heading to Trial

• Final Status Conference
• Trial Outline
• Motions to Exclude Witnesses from Courtroom
• Motions in Limine

Additional Motions

• Ex parte applications
• Continuances
• Reconsideration
• Motions for Sanctions
• Motions to Exclude Witnesses from Courtroom
• 998 offers

Your Pre-Trial Tasks, Selecting and Dealing with Your Jury

• Jury Selection in State Court – Procedure, Strategies and Questionnaires

• Jury Instructions, Jury Verdict Forms
  • What to do, mistakes not to make
  • State court – rules, local rules, chambers rules
  • Difference between state and federal
• Evidence at trial
  • How to get evidence admitted / submitting exhibits at trial
  • Laying foundation
  • Objections & Hearsay Exceptions
  • Privileges
  • Any differences between state and federal rules / procedures
  • Strategic Use

Your Trial

• Opening Statements
• Direct and Cross-Examinations of Lay Witnesses
• Direct and Cross-Examination of Expert witnesses
• Evidentiary Objections
• Just a few tips on Closing Arguments

Preserving the record for appeal, Post-Trial Motions and Judgments

• Preserving the record for appeal – mistakes not to make/what to make sure you do
• Post-Trial Motions
  • Motion for a JNOV
  • Motion for a New Trial
  • Attorneys’ Fees
  • Determining “Prevailing Party” under CCP Sec. 998, 1032 & 1033
  • Filing Notice of Appeal
• Judgments
  • Financial awards
  • Injunctive relief
  • Requirements for entry in jury trials per CCP664
  • How to enforce

Testimonials

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

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

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

“There is a lot of information. It’s like a fire hose of legal stuff. It’s good. A lot to digest.” – Michael Voigt, 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.

“Excellent.” ­ – Suzanne Kenney, 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 information provided! Thank you!” – Daniel Zhivanaj, 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 program with helpful information and insight.” – Kayla Washington, Esq.

“It was a great review.” – Susiejane 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.

“Amazing course!” – Nicholas Lansdown, Esq.

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

“Great speakers!” – Adam Wentland, 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.

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

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

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

“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.

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

“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.

“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.

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

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

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

“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.

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

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

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

“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.

“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.

“John Barber provided a very detailed discussion of depositions with many practical tips on how to become much better at depositions. Judge Williams gave excellent practice tips for attorneys on many key topics.” – Michael A. Miller, Esq.

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

“Thorough.” – Alexander Wallin, Esq.

“Great overview.” – Timothy Laquer, Esq

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

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

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

“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.

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

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

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

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

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

“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.

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

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

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

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

“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.

“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.

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

“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.

“I wanted an overview from beginning to end and that’s exactly what we got.” – Griselda Rodriguez, 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 the only valuable MCLE I have attended in years.”

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

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

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

“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 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.”

“I was preparing for trial so class helps.”

“Very informative, the program met my needs.”

“Great program content.”

“Excellent coverage of a wide range of material.”

“The speakers were fabulous, and the exchange of anecdotes and experiences by John Barber and the judges was fabulous.”

“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.”

“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 were fabulous, and the exchange of anecdotes and experiences by John Barber and the judges was fabulous.”

“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.”

“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

Los Angeles Faculty:

Hon. Lawrence H. Cho
Judge
Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County

The Honorable Lawrence H. Cho is the son of Chinese immigrants and was born and raised in the New York/New Jersey area.  After graduating Rutgers College in 1984 with a major in Economics, he attended Rutgers Law School-Newark and obtained his J.D. in 1987.  Following graduation, he came to Los Angeles to serve as a law clerk on the U.S. District Court to the Honorable Manuel L. Real of the Central District of California.  Following his clerkship, Judge Cho returned to New York to join the Wall Street firm of Cravath, Swaine & Moore as a litigation associate.

Judge Cho returned to Los Angeles in 1990 to join the United States Attorney’s Office as a federal prosecutor.  Over the next 15 years, Judge Cho was appointed to many important roles including training new federal prosecutors as the Chief of the General Crimes unit, Chief of the Organized Crime Strike Force, and following September 11, 2001, led the then newly formed Terrorism and Organized Crime Section.  From 2003 to 2005, Judge Cho was appointed to serve in Washington D.C. as the Deputy Chief of the Counterterrorism Section at the U.S. Department of Justice.

Judge Cho was appointed to the Los Angeles County Superior Court in June 2005 by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.  Since that time, he has enjoyed criminal and civil assignments and is currently assigned to civil jury trials in the Santa Monica Courthouse.  Extensive teaching experience includes serving as an adjunct professor to Loyola Law School teaching trial advocacy, guest lecturing at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia, and teaching fellow judges and bench officers statewide for the Center for Judicial Education and Research of the Judicial Council of California.  

---

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. Kira L. Klatchko
Judge
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. 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.

---

Courtney Abrams, Esq.
Owner
Courtney Abrams, PC

 As a native of Los Angeles, California, Courtney is proud to serve the community in which she was raised. Courtney resides in Manhattan Beach, California with her husband, son and daughter, and devoted dog.

After attending Marlborough High School, and graduating from UCLA’s Honors Program with a degree in Economics and English Literature, Courtney received her J.D. from Southwestern Law School.

During law school, Courtney worked for the ACLU of Southern California on federal cases involving wrongful deportation, mental health and prison reform, and she clerked in the Office of the Los Angeles County Public Defender. Courtney also served as a judicial extern to the Honorable Terry Hatter, Jr., U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, and clerked for civil rights firm Hadsell, Stormer, Keeny, Richardson and Renick.

After graduation from law school, Courtney litigated for nearly ten years before starting her own practice offering representation to individuals who have experienced unlawful employment practices and estate planning clients.

Courtney has been quoted in Forbes and Variety, and from 2014-2019, she was recognized as one of the top Women Attorneys by Los Angeles Magazine and named to the Southern California Rising Star list, an honor received by no more than 2.5 percent of lawyers in California.  In 2020 and 2021, Super Lawyers, a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high-degree of peer recognition and professional achievement selected Courtney as a Southern California “Super Lawyer” in the category of Labor and Employment law. 

In February 2020, Courtney appeared in Nevertheless, a documentary by Emmy-award winning filmmaker Sarah Moshman, which examines the stories behind the headlines of the #MeToo movement and Times Up, and follows seven individuals who have experienced sexual harassment in the workplace or school context. 

Courtney is committed to working with her clients in a compassionate, strategic and meticulous manner. 

---

John L. Barber, Esq.
Partner
Lewis Brisbois

John Barber is a partner in the Los Angeles and Orange County offices of Lewis Brisbois, Chair of the Labor & Employment Practice, and a member of the firm’s Management Committee. His practice is dedicated exclusively to representing and counseling employers in employment-related matters, including litigation, appeals, risk management, policy preparation, and training.

He represents employers in State and Federal Courts, both in California and across the United States, and has extensive experience appearing before all state and federal employment-related agencies, including the California DFEH, DLSE, and EDD, and United States EEOC, and Department of Labor.

Mr. Barber’s practice has a particular emphasis, in addition to single-party discrimination, harassment, retaliation and wrongful termination actions, on wage-and-hour class action litigation. He has defended dozens of class actions, and has specifically defeated Motions for Class Certification. Mr. Barber also serves as one of the principal, lead trial attorneys in the Practice Group, with numerous successful verdicts. He is also a member of the Crisis Management Practice and regularly manages crises pertaining to employment matters.

Mr. Barber served on the California State Bar’s Executive Committee, Labor and Employment Law Section (2008 – 2013) and was an advisor to that committee for years. He was a member of the Judicial Appointments Committee of the Los Angeles County Bar (2009-2014) and is currently a member of the Los Angeles  County Bar’s Judicial Election Evaluation Committee (2012-present). He also lectures and writes extensively.

Active in the community as a member of multiple philanthropic and civic organizations, Mr. Barber is married with three children.

---

Andrew H. Friedman, Esq.
Partner
Helmer Friedman, LLP

Andrew H. Friedman, a name partner with the law firm of Helmer · Friedman LLP, primarily represents employees in all aspects of employment law including not only individual discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and accommodation cases but also complex multi-party wage and hour class actions. Mr. Friedman received his J.D. degree from Cornell Law School and his B.A. degree in history and psychology, cum laude, from Vanderbilt University. At Cornell, Mr. Friedman was a member of the Board of Editors of the Cornell Law Review and a member of the Moot Court Board. Following law school, Mr. Friedman served as a judicial law clerk to the Honorable John T. Nixon, United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. Subsequently, Mr. Friedman was trained as an employment attorney by two of the Nation’s most prestigious management-side employment law firms – Paul, Hastings and Bryan Cave LLP.

Mr. Friedman has handled a wide range of employment-related litigation in state and federal courts. Indeed, Mr. Friedman won (with Tony Lewis of The Lewis Law Firm) a .1 Million jury verdict in a fraud and breach of employment contract lawsuit in the Los Angeles Superior Court and he also prevailed (along with his law partner, Gregory D. Helmer) in a three-week sexual harassment jury trial in the Orange County Superior Court. He also settled a .4 Million wage and hour class action lawsuit in federal court (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California), a .575 Million class action discrimination lawsuit in the Orange County Superior Court and he recovered a .5 Million settlement in federal court (U.S. District Court for the Central District of California) in a wage and hour class action.

Mr. Friedman served as Counsel of Record in Lightfoot v. Cendant Mortgage Corp. et. al. (Case No. 10-56068) where he successfully convinced the U. S. Supreme Court to grant the petition for certiorari that he filed on behalf of his clients. In January 2017, the Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision authored by Justice Sotomayor, reversed the Ninth Circuit and ruled in favor of Mr. Friedman’s clients.

Mr. Friedman has received the highest possible Martindale-Hubble rating ("AV"), indicating that he is ranked at the highest level of professional excellence with "very high to preeminent legal ability" and "very high" ethical standards as established by confidential opinions from members of the Bar. Law & Politics Magazine and the publishers of Los Angeles Magazine selected Mr. Friedman as a 2006 – 2021 Southern California "Super Lawyer" in the category of Labor and Employment Law. Additionally, in 2020 & 2021, Super Lawyers named Andrew H. Friedman to its list of the Top 100 Super Lawyers in Southern California and Lawdragon named Mr. Friedman to its list of the nation’s top 500 plaintiff employment and civil rights attorneys.

---

Angel James Horacek, Esq.
Owner
Law Offices of Angel J. Horacek, P.C.

Angel James Horacek practices employment and civil rights law on behalf of employees. She focuses primarily in three areas: anti-discrimination and harassment; anti-retaliation and whistleblowing; and fair pay for employees.

At Law Offices of Angel J. Horacek, PC, Ms. Horacek represents employees in litigation, trials, arbitrations, hearings, and administrative processes. She also advises individuals regarding workplace or employment issues that arise prior to or during employment.

Ms. Horacek is admitted to practice in all state courts in California, in the United States District Court for the Central, Northern, and Southern Districts of California, and in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. She was also an extern in the chambers of the Honorable Andrew J. Wistrich of the United States Federal Court for the Central District of California.

Ms. Horacek is the co-chair of the Los Angeles County Bar Association’s Labor and Employment Saturday Seminar Committee, which presents cutting-edge continuing legal educational programs for lawyers and law students several times through the year. Ms. Horacek also participates on the California Employment Lawyers Association Fair Employment & Housing Council Committee, which

drafts comprehensive comments to ensure that FEHA regulations accurately reflect California’s laws. She volunteers with the Los Angeles Black Workers Center in View Park, most recently as legal supervisor to its 2020 Peggy Browning Fellow.

Ms. Horacek has been named as a Southern California Super Lawyer from 2017 to 2021. Ms. Horacek has been a featured speaker and moderator for the State Bar of California, the Los Angeles County Bar Association, and a variety of other entities. She is a member of the California Bar, the Los Angeles County Bar Association, the California Employment Lawyers Association, Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles, and Black Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles. She is a lifetime member of the John M. Langston Bar Association. Ms. Horacek was previously an associate commercial litigator at an AmLaw 100 firm focusing on business and corporate clients and was an associate attorney at a boutique employee-side litigation firm.

Ms. Horacek obtained both her Juris Doctor and Bachelor degrees from the University of California, Los Angeles. While at UCLA Law, she obtained a specialization in Business Law and Policy and a concentration in Critical Race Studies. She also served as the SBA President at UCLA Law for her graduating class. Ms. Horacek currently serves as Secretary of the Alumni Board at Harvard Westlake School.

---

Virginia Milstead, Esq.
Partner
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Ms. Milstead has advised clients on matters involving federal and state securities laws, duties of corporate directors, civil RICO, unfair business practices, and various other contract and tort claims. Among others, she has represented: Baidu, Inc. and two of its senior officers in securing the dismissal of a federal securities class action alleging that the company had misrepresented its ability to comply with Chinese internet content regulations in a series of 12 public statements spanning more than a year. This case was recognized by the Daily Journal as one of the Top Verdicts of 2021 in California; the underwriters in the IPO of GoodRx in securing the dismissal of a putative class action filed in the Central District of California in connection with the company’s September 2020 IPO. The complaint alleged, among other things, that the GoodRx registration statement contained false or misleading statements related to Amazon’s entry into the prescription drug discount market; LexinFintech in securing the dismissal of a securities fraud class action alleging that the company made material misrepresentations or omissions in connection with, among other topics, its user base, loan terms and credit quality in violation of Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Jumei International in securing the dismissal of a putative securities fraud class action alleging that the company made material misrepresentations or omissions in connection with the proxy statement for its going-private transaction in violation of Section 10(b) and 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act; ZTO Express (Cayman) Inc. in securing the dismissal of a securities class action alleging offering materials related to ZTO’s IPO omitted a change in the company’s pricing; Pinduoduo Inc. in securing the dismissal of Securities Act claims in connection with its 2018 initial public offering of American depositary shares, alleging that the defendants made material misstatements and omissions in the offering documents filed in connection with the IPO; Yirendai Ltd. in securing a dismissal with prejudice of federal securities class action claims; ChinaCache International Holdings, Ltd. in securing a dismissal with prejudice of federal securities class action claims; the underwriters for an offering of preferred units in an oil and gas master limited partnership in securing a dismissal and favorable settlement of federal securities class action claims; the founder and CEO of a semiconductor manufacturer in federal securities class action claims; Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in a federal securities class action and derivative litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging misrepresentations in press releases, conference calls and SEC filings related to, among other things, the effectiveness of the company’s flagship product and prospects for growth; Nationwide Health Properties, Inc. and certain of its officers and directors in litigation arising from Nationwide’s merger with Ventas, Inc., resulting in a dismissal with prejudice and a favorable decision on an issue of first impression under Maryland law; UNC Lear Services, Inc. and Lear Siegler Services, Inc. in a successful defense at trial and before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit against breach of contract and civil RICO claims brought by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; certain former outside directors of Countrywide Financial Corporation in securities, derivative and ERISA litigations; and the founder of a casino in Las Vegas in a successful defense at trial against claims for fraud and invasion of privacy brought by the founder’s former spouse.

In 2022, Ms. Milstead was named a Leader of Influence — Litigators and Trial Attorneys by the Los Angeles Business Journal, which also has selected her to its lists of leading professionals who are Thriving in Their 40s and who are Women of Influence. She also has been recognized repeatedly in Chambers USA, in which she has been described by clients as “a gifted litigator and a strong oral advocate … [with an] ability to cut through complexity and focus on the critical issues.” She also received the Distinguished Alumna Award from Pepperdine Caruso School of Law in 2021. Ms. Milstead is a frequent speaker at, and organizer of, legal education events. Among other roles, Ms. Milstead has taught constitutional law at the Pepperdine Caruso School of Law, has been a regular panelist for the annual Federal Court Boot Camp and Superior Court Boot Camp presented by Pincus Professional Education, has served as co-chair of the Litigation Committee of the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles and has organized WLALA’s annual Litigators’ Forum. Ms. Milstead also served as a panelist at the Third Annual William French Lecture at the Pepperdine Caruso School of Law, featuring retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

Ms. Milstead is a graduate of Pepperdine University School of Law (J.D., 2004, summa cum laude), and was Literary and Citation Editor of the Pepperdine Law Review.

---

Matthew C. Slentz, Esq.
Senior Counsel
Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, PC

 Matthew is an associate with Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley’s litigation practice group and resident in our Pasadena office. Matthew litigates a range of disputes for our public agency clients in both trial and appellate courts, including suits involving inverse condemnation, utility user taxes, Public Records Act disputes, post-redevelopment disputes, rates and fees, government contracts, land use and cannabis regulation.

Before joining CHW, Matthew served as Chief Deputy Public Defender for Stanislaus County.  In this role, Matthew managed a team of attorneys defending misdemeanor cases, including violations of local ordinances, coordinated with city and county officials on nuisance abatement strategies, and helped formulate his agency’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

As a deputy public defender, Matthew conducted 25 jury trials to verdict in felony and misdemeanor cases. He has filed writs and appeals in local and appellate courts and has extensive motion-practice, including Pitchess motions and Cervantes hearings.

While in law school, Matthew worked as a legal assistant for the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Inspector General.  He also served as the Executive Senior Editor for the Georgetown Journal of International Law and on the board of the Equal Justice Foundation.

Matthew graduated magna cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center. At graduation, he received the Alan Goldstein Award for excellence in criminal defense and was inducted into the Order of the Coif. He received a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy from the University of California, Irvine, where he was a Regents’ Scholar and graduated with Scholastic Merit.

---

Kimberly A. Valentine, Esq.
Principal Attorney
Valentine Law Group

Ms. Valentine is the principal attorney at Valentine Law Group. She received her Juris Doctorate degree with honors, from Western State University in 1997. She is licensed to practice law in California and Arizona.

Ms. Valentine has dedicated her career in the practice of law to advocating for the vulnerable, the injured and the infirm. Her focus is to ensure that individuals are not needlessly taken advantage of or exposed to unnecessary harm. Her clients ages span from newborn children to elderly as old as 104. She practices in the areas of elder abuse, medical malpractice, products liability, serious personal injury, and government tort claims litigation.

Ms. Valentine is an Associate with the American Board of Trial Advocates. She has received the Orange County Trial Lawyers Association’s Top Gun award as an exceptional Elder Abuse litigator multiple times and has been recognized as a California Trial Lawyers Associations “Street Fighter” Award finalist. She was also named a Super Lawyer each year from 2014 through 2020. Super Lawyers Southern California Magazine named her as one of the top 50 Orange County lawyers and Top 50 Women lawyers in Southern California. The American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA) awarded her the Volunteer of the Year award for the Orange County chapter in 2019.

Ms. Valentine is the founder of Operation Helping Hands, a non profit that provides backpacks full of necessity items to the homeless population. Ms. Valentine received the 2019 Trial Lawyers Care award from the American Association for Justice for her work in the community with Operation Helping Hands. She is one of the founding members and serves on the Board of Directors for Stop Elder Abuses, a non-profit organization which educates the public on the issue of abuse. She also sits on the Advisory Committee to the Los Angeles Elder Abuse Forensic Center. Ms. Valentine also serves on the advisory board for the non-profit organization Together We Rise which is dedicated to improving the lives of foster children. She served on the Board of Governors for the Consumer Attorneys of California between 2009 and 2012 and was active in Consumer Attorneys of California Women’s Caucus. Ms. Valentine served on the Board of Directors for the Orange County Trial Lawyers Association from 2007 through 2011. She is also a member of CAALA, OCTLA, OCBA, ABOTA, the American Association for Justice, and the American Jurist Association.

She guest speaks and lectures on various topics including elder abuse, medical malpractice, trial presentation and life skills.

---

---

San Francisco Faculty:

Hon. James P. Kleinberg (Ret.)
Retired California Superior Court Judge, Santa Clara County
Neutral, JAMS

Judge James Kleinberg brings a diverse background to his role as arbitrator and mediator: Federal prosecutor, thirty-four years of business litigation experience throughout the United States and abroad, twelve years as a Superior Court Trial Judge, including three years managing and trying cases in the complex civil calendar, and over four years as a neutral at JAMS. At JAMS, in addition to an active arbitration and mediation practice, he has been chosen to hear mock arguments and trials and to teach and write on litigation subjects here and abroad.

After graduating from the University of Michigan Law School in 1967 Judge Kleinberg was a Trial Attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division. In 1969 he entered commercial litigation practice with a firm in San Francisco where he became a partner. In 1983 he joined McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen (later Bingham McCutchen) as a litigation partner in San Jose, Palo Alto, and San Francisco. His national and international business litigation practice emphasized intellectual property, antitrust, securities, corporate governance, and contract issues. He was listed for over ten years in the publication “Best Lawyers in America.” He served for over ten years as an advisor to the Litigation Section of the State Bar, is a Holton Teaching Fellow at the Haas Graduate School of Business, U.C. Berkeley, and has served as a member of the American College of Business Court Judges. In 2013 he was named “Outstanding Jurist” by the Santa Clara County Bar Association, and in 2014 he was named “Trial Judge of the Year” by the Santa Clara County Trial Lawyers Association. He serves as co-ombudsperson in a program initiated by the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. While in practice he was actively involved in programs for the Ninth Circuit and was on the Magistrate Judge Selection Panel for the District Court. He has been a frequent speaker at programs presented by PLI, the ABA, the State Bar of California, the Sedona Conference, and the San Francisco and Santa Clara Bar Associations. Judge Kleinberg currently serves as a board member for the Association of Business Trial Lawyers-Northern California, the Ingram American Inn of Court, and the Campaign for Legal Services.

---

Hon. Richard B. Ulmer
Judge
Superior Court of California, San Francisco County

Judge Richard Ulmer has been on the Superior Court bench in San Francisco since 2009.

Just months into his judicial tenure, Judge Ulmer was elected by his fellow judges to the Executive Committee, a small group of judges that sets policy for the Court. He is humbled that 50 of his colleagues have given him their endorsement for his June election for Superior Court.

Prior to joining the bench, Judge Ulmer compiled a sterling record in 23 years as a trial and appellate lawyer at two of San Francisco’s pre-eminent law firms — McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen and Latham & Watkins. His legal skills annually won him recognition from his peers as a "Northern California Super Lawyer," as well as other awards.

Judge Ulmer graduated from Stanford Law School with honors in 1986, and won his first trial while still an associate at McCutchen. In 1995, he joined Latham & Watkins where he worked closely for former U.S. District Judge Barbara Caulfield and handled complex cases for some of the world’s most innovative high-tech and biotech companies including Adobe, Affymetrix, Apple, Genentech, Lexmark, National Semiconductor, Raychem and Roche.

Judge Ulmer also briefed and argued more than a dozen appeals to the courts. He has the rare distinction of having two appellate decisions (both wins) published on the same day. One of these, Schectman v. Pillsbury, is frequently cited in California cases involving stolen documents.

His 23-year practice spanned intellectual property, antitrust and unfair competition, appeals and writs, automotive distribution, contracts, employment law, fraud, licensing, international arbitration, prison reform and professional malpractice. The unusually large breadth of experience has served Judge Ulmer well in his time on the bench.

---

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

Judge Helen E. Williams was appointed to the Santa Clara County Superior Court in 2012. She has sat in unlimited civil and criminal assignments, served as the court’s designated CEQA judge, and served for six years on the court’s Appellate Division, four of those as its Presiding Judge. 

Before joining the bench, Judge Williams, who is certified as an appellate specialist by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization, worked in chambers for eight years as a research attorney at the Sixth District Court of Appeal, focusing on civil and criminal cases and drafting opinions in those cases for the authoring justice. Before that, Judge Williams engaged in civil practice for 18 years beginning with a small litigation firm with her father and moving to larger firms with increasing focus on appellate specialization and dispositive motions such as summary judgment and anti-SLAPP, along with post-trial motions and other trial matters such as critical in limine motions and jury instructions. 

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

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

---

Barbara R. Adams, Esq.
Of Counsel
Steptoe & Johnson LLP

Barbara R. Adams specializes in the defense of toxic tort and product liability litigation involving asbestos, lead, food toxins, underground tanks, and other chemicals in personal injury, property damage, and long-term/latent injury litigation actions. Ms. Adams has completed numerous jury trials in most of the Bay Area Superior Courts, otherwise successfully resolved complex cases, and has participated in the development of complex litigation rules for the Superior and Federal courts.

Ms. Adams also has significant experience and expertise in appellate law. She has filed and defended appeals, writs, and petitions before the California Courts of Appeal, the California Supreme Court, and the Federal Courts of Appeal. Ms. Adams handles appeals in which she has not been involved in the underlying litigation.

You can read Ms. Adams’ views on toxic tort and chemical exposure issues at her blog, Toxics Defense.

Ms. Adams received her B.A. in Political Science from California State University at Fullerton in 1977 and her J.D. from the University of Santa Clara School of Law in 1981. She is admitted to practice in California, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. District Court for the Northern and Eastern Districts of California.

---

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. She serves as the co-chair of the BASF Barristers’ Litigation Section, a position she has held since 2016. She also spearheaded efforts to increase the profile of female leaders in the field and is an active mentor. Evan has been selected as a Northern California Rising Star by Super Lawyers Magazine for the past three years, an honor reserved for 2.5% of U.S. lawyers, and has been profiled by the Bar Association of San Francisco and the Justice & Diversity Center.

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.

---

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.

---

Sebastian E. Kaplan, Esq.
Of Counsel
Meyers Nave

Sebastian Kaplan litigates disputes involving construction, commercial transactions and contracts, intellectual property (copyright, trademark, trade secrets), and policyholder-side insurance. He also counsels clients on new product litigation risks, employment mobility issues, and IP portfolio management.

Sebastian represents clients in federal and state courts and has resolved claims through trial, arbitration, and appeal. He has extensive pre-litigation and pre-trial experience, simultaneously balancing high-stakes litigation with cease and desist disputes, subpoena responses, and numerous commercial disputes. Sebastian has managed document collection in several major litigations that involved complex ESI issues, including identification and forensic collection of documents from mobile devices and collaborative databases.

Sebastian clerked for the Honorable Carlos T. Bea at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from 2009-2010.

Sebastian frequently writes and speaks on issues of trade secrets litigation, including the Defend Trade Secrets Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and trademark litigation and copyright issues. He is also committed to pro bono homelessness prevention and represents indigent tenants facing eviction. In 2015, Sebastian was awarded the Bar Association of San Francisco’s annual Housing Justice Award for first-chairing a four-day unlawful detainer trial.

---

Michelle G. Lee, Esq.
Partner
Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe LLP

Ms. Lee represents employees in individual and class action litigation in a range of employment matters.  She is experienced in wage and hour, wrongful termination, discrimination, retaliation, harassment, breach of contract, and trade secrets matters. 

Before joining Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe, Ms. Lee was an associate at a prominent national litigation firm, where she handled a wide variety of complex cases ranging from intellectual property disputes to securities lawsuits.  Ms. Lee also served as a law clerk for the Honorable William Alsup of the Northern District of California. 

Ms. Lee is a graduate, cum laude, of the University of Michigan Law School where she was an editor for the Michigan Journal of Law Reform.  Ms. Lee interned at the Office of Legal Advisor of the U.S. Department of State in Geneva, Switzerland and worked as a law clerk for the Southern Center for Human Rights in Atlanta, Georgia.  Ms. Lee received her undergraduate degree in biology from Yale University.

---

Nic Roethlisberger, Esq.

Kwun Bhansali Lazarus LLP

Nic Roethlisberger has a broad litigation practice and has tried cases in state and federal court, as well as  private arbitration. He has experience in everything from complex commercial litigation and class action defense to intellectual property and shareholder derivative lawsuits.

Nic has handled large, high-stakes matters worth hundreds of millions of dollars and smaller, sensitive cases where clients faced both monetary and reputational risk.  Nic’s experience ranges from from pre-litigation negotiations through depositions, motion practice, trial, and appeal. He has examined witnesses at trial, argued dispositive motions, and written appellate briefs in both the California Courts of Appeal and the Ninth Circuit.

Nic is a Bay Area native and before law school was a newspaper editor.  He now lives in Oakland with his wife and daughter.

---

Michael B. Sachs, Esq.
Senior Attorney
Clark Hill PLC

Michael Sachs represents clients in labor and employment, general litigation, and Proposition 65 cases.

In his labor and employment practice, Michael assists clients with wage and hour claims, Fair Employment and Housing/Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claims (discrimination, harassment, and retaliation), breach of contract claims, severance agreements, and termination decisions. He provides pre-litigation counseling so clients can avoid potential issues that may lead to litigation and evaluates the possibility for early resolution of claims. Where litigation has commenced, Michael manages the case from intake to verdict. Michael has tried multiple employment matters to verdict in the California state and federal courts and argued multiple cases before the California Court of Appeal.

In his general litigation practice, Michael represents manufacturers and insurance companies in personal injury actions, consumer warranty claims, toxic tort litigation, and product liability actions. Michael has defended midsized to Fortune 500 companies faced with multimillion-dollar damage claims. He has successfully represented his clients by prevailing on dispositive motions, receiving dismissals, and taking cases to verdict.

Michael also assists manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, and retailers in Proposition 65 (California’s “Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986”) compliance. This includes reviewing product lines for items that may be subject to Proposition 65, drafting and updating warning labels, counseling on best practices for compliance and implementation of Proposition 65 compliance programs, responding to 60-day notices, and managing litigation of Proposition 65 cases.

Michael is devoted to his clients and his goal is to find cost-effective ways to manage their cases, while still vigorously defending their interests inside and outside of the courtroom. He has achieved numerous successful results for his clients through settlement negotiations, mediations, dispositive motions, and trial.

---

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. 

---

Fees

Recorded Packages Available include:

• Video Recording*: $455
• “Audio Only” Recording (for listening in your car, etc.): $455
• Video and “Audio Only” Recording Packages Combined – Get both for only $50 more: $505 

You can order our recorded packages in two formats:

• Download
• DVD/CD

For CDs/DVDs, please add $8.50 shipping and, in CA, sales tax.

All Recorded packages (download or CD/DVD) are available approximately two to three weeks after the seminar is held.

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.

Terms and Policies

Recording policy: No audio or video recording of any program is permitted.

Seminar Cancellations: Should you be unable to attend for any reason, please inform us in writing no later than 14 days prior to the event and a credit voucher will be issued. If you prefer, a refund, less a $50 non-refundable deposit, will be issued. No refunds or credits will be given for cancellations received within 14 days of an event. However, if you notify us within 14 days of an event, and wish to convert your in-person attendance registration to an Audio CD package (with handout), we can do so. A small additional shipping charge, and sales tax in CA, will be incurred. No shipping charge is incurred for downloads. We will also issue a voucher for the amount paid if you notify us within 14 days and prefer not to have the audio recording.

Substitutions may be made at any time.

Webinars, Tele-seminars and Webcast Cancellations: Once log-in codes and passwords are issued for a webinar, tele-seminars or webcasts, a refund is not possible. If for any reason you cannot attend the event after you have received the codes, we will automatically convert your registration to an instant streaming/instant download or CD format and provide you with the information you need to access the recording after the program concludes and the recording is available.  Conversions to CD require a $8.50 shipping fee, and in CA, 9% sales tax.

Downloads/CDs/DVDs – Refund policy:

Downloads are non-returnable/non-refundable once purchased and received. Tapes, CDs and DVDs are returnable for a full refund or replacement if defective, within 90 days of purchase.

Reminder: The room temperature at hotels and other seminar locations are notoriously hard to control. Please bring a sweater or jacket in case it gets cold and/or layer as if you are going to the movies so you are comfortable.