Special Licenses/Certifications:

• Certified Specialist in Appellate Law, State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization

Bar/Professional Activity:

• 2011 - present:  Chair of Amicus/Appellate Committee of Alameda-Contra Costa County Bar Association
• 1999-2003:  President, Contra Costa County Bar Association Appellate Section
• 2010 - present:  Admitted to United States District Court, Central District of California
• 1998 - present:  Admitted to practice before United States Supreme Court
• 1987 - present:  Admitted to United States District Court, Northern District of California
• 1990 - present:  Admitted to United States District Court, Eastern District of California
• 1989 - present:  Admitted to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
• 1987 - present:  Admitted to State Bar of California
• 2003-present:  Member, Family Law Section, Contra Costa County Bar Association
• 2009-present:  Member, Board of Directors of Alameda-Contra Costa Trial Lawyers Association
• 1993-2004:  Member, Eastern Alameda County Bar Association
• 1995-1996:  President, Contra Costa County Bar Association Appellate Section
• 1993-1995:  Program Director, Contra Costa County Bar Association Appellate Section
• 1996-2003:  Member, Contra Costa County Bar Assorication Membership/Education Committee
• 2003-present:  Director, Contra Costa County Bar Association Appellate Section
• 2007-2010:  Member of State Bar of California Committee on Appellate Courts

Pro bono/Community Service:

• 2012:  Participated as Judge, Witkin Institute's Roger S. Traynor Moot Court Competition.
• 1996-1998:  Member, Advisory Board, Mount Diablo National Bank
• 1995-2005:  Member, Vice President, Board of Directors, East Bay Depot for Creative Reuse, Inc.
• 1999-2003:  Member, ValleyCare Foundation Board of Trustees
• 2000:  Participated as Judge, Boalt Hall School of Law's McBaine Moot Court Competition
• 2001:  Participated as judge, Witkin Institute's Roger S. Traynor Moot Court Competition
• 2007:  Participated as judge, Witkin Institute's Roger S. Traynor Moot Court Competition

Scholarly Lectures and Writings:

• Fall 2009, The Verdict, a publication of the Alameda-Contra Costa Trial Lawyers Association, "Preserving Appellate Review of Trial Court Exclusion of Evidence."  Wrote an article detailing the steps required to preserve appellate review of a trial court's exclusion of evidence.
• September 2008, State Bar Convention, State Bar of California, Monterey, California:  "Tales from the Appellate Bench:"Moderated panel with Presiding Justice Arthur Scotland of the Third District Court of Appeal, Associate Justice Laurie Zelon of Division Seven, Second District Court of Appeal, Richard McAdams, Sixth District Court of Appeal, on what appellate justices in different districts look for in cases on appeal, and potential traps in the appellate process, from preserving the record through oral argument.
• October 2008:  Presented seminar on the procedural requirements and potential traps of those considering appeals during the time period between decision or verdict and filing a notice of appeal., Lecturer, Timeline from Decision or Verdict to Appeal: Tricks and Traps, Eastern Alameda County Bar Association
• September 1993 Contra Costa Lawyer, "Recent Developments in Appellate Law:  Both State and Federal Appellate Courts Tighten their jurisdictional requirements."  Wrote article on how appellate courts appeared to be adopting stricter standards as to from what and when an appellant could file a notice of appeal
• 1995, Refuse News, "Handling Recycling Cases on Appeal:  Rancho Mirage and Beyond."  Wrote article on the issues addressed and unaddressed by the California Supreme Court in Rancho Mirage case, appeared in May 1995 issue
• June 19, 1995 Daily Journal, "Lack of Deference--Examining the Ways Cities May Take Official Action:"  Wrote article on the capacities in which cities act, whether legislatively or quasi-judicially, and how that capacity impacts the burden of proof in mandamus cases
• 1995, The Trumbull Law Firm's Annual Recycling Law Seminar, "Handling Recycling Cases on Appeal:  Rancho Mirage and Beyond:"  Presented seminar on issues addressed by the California Supreme Court in the Waste Management case, issues left unaddressed by the Court
• February 1996 Contra Costa Lawyer, a publication of the Contra Costa County Bar Association, "A Procedural Roadmap to Civil and Criminal Appeals."  Co-authored, with Julie Schumer, an article on the process of handling an appeal from filing a notice of appeal through filing a petition for review with the California Supreme Court
• 1996 MCLE Spectacular, Contra Costa County Bar Association, "Handling Civil Writs in the Court of Appeal:"  As part of a panel, described the process and difficulties associated with obtaining extraordinary writ relief in the Court of Appeal
• June 2007:  In Chancery, a publication of the Family Law Section of the Contra Costa County Bar Association:  "A Report on Oral Argument before the California Supreme Court in Elkins."  Wrote article describing the oral argument before the California Supreme Court in In re Marriage of Elkins (2007) 41 Cal.4th 1337, which pertained to the validity of trial setting orders in Contra Costa County family law matters,
• 1999, Eastern Alameda County Bar Association, "Processing Civil Appeals from Beginning to End:"  Described the process of handling a civil appeal from filing a notice of appeal through remittitur back to the trial court, including filing a petition for review with the California Supreme Court
• 2002, Small firm and sole practitioners' section, Contra Costa County Bar Association, Eastern Alameda County Bar Association:  "A Procedural Road Map to Civil and Criminal Appeals:"  Along with criminal appellate specialist Julie Schumer, discussed the process of handling an appeal from filing a notice of appeal to filing a petition for review with the California Supreme Court
• 2000 MCLE Spectacular, Contra Costa County:  "Processing Civil Appeals from Beginning to End."  As part of a panel, described the process of handling a civil appeal from filing a notice of appeal through remittitur back to the trial court, including filing a petition for review with the California Supreme Court
• 2006 MCLE Spectacular, Contra Costa County Bar Association:  "Tales from the Bench:  What really works at the First District Court of Appeal:"  Moderated a panel with Justices Rivera, Simon and Swager of the First District Court of Appeal on what the First District looks for in an appeal and dangers in the appellate process, from preserving the record through oral argument
• 2001 MCLE Spectacular, Contra Costa County Bar Association, "Family Law Appeals and Writs:  Tricks and Traps:"  As part of a panel, discussed issues particular to appeals and writs in the family law context, including record preservation and creation for appeal, when an appeal is available, and when a writ is the only available appellate alternative
• 2002 MCLE Spectacular, Contra Costa County Bar Association:  "A Roadmap through the Appellate Maze.  With Justice Swager of the First District Court of Appeal and criminal appellate specialist Julie Schumer, discussed the appellate process from beginning to end, including record creation and preservation matters in the trial court

Verdicts and Settlements:

• Bruner v. Geldermann, Inc. (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 662:  The First District reversed a trial court judgment in favor Geldermann. Geldermann sued Bruner for real estate commissions in connection with the sale of commercial real estate. After a sixteen-day court trial, the trial judge disclosed that he had entered into an agreement with plaintiff?s counsel regarding a piece of real estate. Bruner tried and failed to disqualify the trial judge for cause at both the trial and appellate court levels. Bruner timely requested a statement of decision and objected to the proposed statement of decision. The trial judge denied the objections and issued the statement of decision and judgment in the same minute order in which he voluntarily disqualified himself under California Code of Civil Procedure § 170.4.   The 1st District held that the effect of the disqualification was to invalidate the statement of decision and judgment. The Court also held that none of the exceptions to the disqualification rule applied and that entry of the statement of decision and judgment were not ministerial acts. I wrote the portion of the reply brief that dealt with this issue (the 1st District seemed to adopt this reasoning), and signed the brief (another co-counsel wrote the portion of the brief dealing with the commission dispute). With three (3) other counsel already listed my name did not appear as a counsel of record in the official reports.
• Padda v. Hamedi-Fard, et al., unpublished opinion filed December 27, 2007, First District Court of Appeal, Div. 3, Case No. A113703:  Obtained affirmance of judgment awarding damages and attorneys' fees to owner of service station for breaching contractual and tortious duties in installing new underground storage tanks
• Shapell Industries, et al. v. Governing Board of Milpitas Unified School District (1991) 1 Cal.App.4th 218:  Obtained a reversal in the Sixth District Court of Appeal of a judgment in favor of Shapell holding that school facilities fees were wrongfully imposed by the School District and refunding all of the fees to the developer, on the grounds that the fee study was flawed.  The Sixth District reversed the judgment, upheld 90% of the residential fees and all of the commercial/industrial fees imposed. The Court found flaws in the district's fee justification study, but also held the study contained sufficient evidence to justify imposing 90% of the residential fees actually imposed. The Court also held, based on the legislative history of Government Code § 66020(e), that the developer only recovers the portion of the fee that exceeds the amount the district can properly impose.
• Williams v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of America (9th Cir. 1997), 113 F.3d 1108, partially overruled in Wetzel v. Lou Ehlers Cadillac Group Long Term Disability Ins. Program (9th Cir. 2000), 222 F.3d 643:  Obtained reversal of trial court summary judgment on behalf of plaintiff seeking longterm disability claims under ERISA.  Issues involved what was the accrual trigger for plaintiff's claim and whether plaintiff showed triable issues of fact of whether he provided adequate proof of disability and when he knew or should have known that he claim was denied
• Newcomb v. Superior Court, First District Court of Appeal Case No. A090777, alternative writ issued July 20, 2000:  Obtained alternative writ, with which trial court later complied, ordering the trial court to vacate an order expunging lis pendens and to enter new order denying motion to expunge lis pendens in marital dissolution proceeding, on the grounds that there was not yet a final judgment that could order my client to convey her community property interest in the residence to her ex-husband in dispute about whether a transmutation of my client's community property interest in the family residence took place.  Parties later settled on appeal
• Hughey v. City of Hayward (1994) 24 Cal.App.4th 206:  The First District denied a motion to dismiss the appeal for untimeliness. The Court held that the sixty (60) day time limit under former California Rule of Court 2(a) only begins to run from the date of service of a document entitled "Notice of Entry" or a file-stamped copy of judgment or appealable order. The one hundred eighty (180) day limit under former Rule of Court 2(b) runs from the date of entry of the minute order unless the minute order designated prevailing party to prepare the order after hearing, irrespective of Rule of Court 391. The opinion prompted the adoption of the last paragraph of former Rule of Court 2(b)(currently Rule of Court 8.104(d)(2)), effective January 1, 1995
• Waste Management of the Desert, Inc. v. Palm Springs Recycling Center (1994) 7 Cal.4th 478:  Co-counsel for over 65 cities across California as amicus curiae.  Argued that local agencies had the police power authority to enter into exclusive commercial recycling franchise agreements in order to comply with AB 939, which required cities and counties to reduce their waste stream by 50% by 2000 or face substantial daily fines.  The California Supreme Court, by a 5-2 majority, examined the issue strictly under AB 939 and held that owners of property who left their recyclables out for donation, not for compensation, left "discarded" property under the Act which was subject to exclusive franchise agreements, modifying a 4th District Court of Appeal decision.  The dissent, written by current Chief Justice George, adopted our police powers argument
• Brossoit v. Brossoit (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 361:  Obtained reversal on behalf of the mother of trial court order declining child custody jurisdiction pursuant to Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (former Cal. Family Code §§ 3400-3425), now Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act  (current Cal. Fam. §§ 3400-3465).  Trial court abused its discretion in declining child custody jurisdiction where children had lived in California all their lives until their grandmother moved them out of state, California was their home state and had continuing jurisdiction over the proceedings, and retroactively granting Tennessee jurisdiction would have encouraged the type of unilateral removal of the children that the Act was designed to prevent
• W.W.S.M. Investors, et al. v. Greve, Clifford, et al. (1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 517:  Obtained modification of trial court judgment that imposed a lien on plaintiff's damages for legal malpractice, based on plaintiff's success on appeal in underlying case against IRS.  Lien, imposed to prevent plaintiff's double recovery, would be inequitable unless it was net of attorney's fees and costs incurred in pursuing underlying case
• Singh v. Sharma, First District Court of Appeal, Case No. A092081, unpublished opinion filed October 22, 2001:  On respondent's behalf, obtained affirmance of $1.05 million default judgment
• Altura, et al. v. Shelfbond, et al., First District Court of Appeal, Case No. A087446, unpublished opinion filed June 12, 2000:  Obtained affirmance on behalf of respondents of trial court order denying motion to set aside $264,000 default judgment, on grounds that counsel for judgment creditor did everything possible to provide reasonable notice to defendant of complaint against it, upholding service by California Secretary of State's office
• Altura, et al. v. Shelfbond, et al., First District Court of Appeal, Case No. A094433, unpublished opinion filed March 25, 2002:  Represented respondents and obtained affirmance of order upholding $264,000 default judgment following reconsideration of order initially granting the motion to vacate for lack of a statement of damages, on the grounds that the complaint contained sufficient notice of the amount of damages.  Subsequently successfully opposed petition for review
• Pratt v. Lloyd, First District Court of Appeal Case No. A108164, 1st District's appellate mediation program.  Obtained a favorable settlement March 2005 for appellant in dispute arising out of calculation of Epstein credits
• Cearley, et al. v. Azizian, et al., First District Court of Appeal, Case No. A107231, unpublished opinion filed April 19, 2006:  Obtained a reversal of a jury verdict for compensatory and punitive damages that followed a thirteen (13) day trial involving a dispute arising out of a contract for the sale of commercial real estate.  The appellate court reversed the judgment based on violation of the parol evidence rule and also held that respondents' recovery of damages for lost wages was improper
• In re Marriage of MacIntyre, First District Court of Appeal Case No. 109304, unpublished decision filed July 7, 2006:  Represented respondent and obtained affirmance of imposition of Family Code section 271 sanctions in property division proceedings
• Oakley v. Oakley, First District Court of Appeal, Case No. A110180, unpublished opinion filed August 9, 2006:  Represented respondent and obtained affirmance of trial court judgment holding against attempt by appellant to impose a resulting trust on respondent's real property
• Gotelli v. Latteri, First District Court of Appeal Case No. A108378, unpublished decision filed October 12, 2006:  Obtained reversal of judgment on cross-appeal of judgment denying award of child support arrearages on grounds that release of mother's child support claims by mother's agent did not waive the mother's child support claims where father failed to detrimentally rely on release  and affirmance of appeal of judgment holding that father failed to pay child support arrearages and that litigation privilege applied to recording of child support judgment lien
• Valenty v. Valenty, First District Court of Appeal Case No. A096601, unpublished decision filed December 27, 2002:  Representing respondent, obtained affirmance of trial court judgment denying appellant's motion for a share of respondent's military retirement benefits subject to McCarty v. McCarty window period.  Appellant sought to recover a community property share as omitted assets and to modify spousal support
• Johnson v. Superior Court, First District Court of Appeal, Div. 5, Case No. A120856: Order denying petition for writ of mandamus, prohibition filed June 5, 2008. Represented Real Party in Interest in opposing writ petition regarding grandparent supervision., 2008
• Johnson v. Gebhardt, First District Court of Appeal, Div. 5, Case No. A121548:  Appeal dismissed with prejudice October 3, 2008.  Represented Respondent in companion appeal to Case No. A120856 and filed Opposition to Petition for Writ of Supersedeas regarding grandparent visitation.  Dismissed as part of settlement that provided Respondent with greater  share of custody of his children., 2008
• Grima (Burford) v. Superior Court, First District Court of Appeal, Div. 1, Case No. A126852:  Order denying Petitition for Writ of Mandate, Prohibition filed December 29, 2009.  Represented Real Party in Interest in child custody "move away" case.  Following an Answer on behalf of Real Party, the California Supreme Court denied review February 10, 2010, Case No. S179222., 2009
• Vanderkous, et al. v. Conley (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 111.  Obtained affirmance of judgment awarding my client $214,000 as the fair market value and attorney's fees awarded as a condition of vacating an initial judgment, less improvement costs, of a disputed piece of real estate in which appellant sought to quiet title and declaratory relief.  Appellant argued that he properly filed a request for dismissal with the clerk's office one day before an evidentiary hearing setting the value of the property and therefore the amount to be awarded to my client.  The matter had already been submitted and a statement of decision issued that resolved the quiet title and declaratory relief issues and required appellant to compensate my client for the fair market value of property in which she held equitable title., 2010
• Kelley v. The Conco Companies, et al., (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 191, First District Court of Appeal, Division Five, Case No. A126865, filed June 6, 2011.  The First District reversed a summary judgment granted to employer Conco, one of California's largest concrete construction companies, on the grounds that my client Patrick Kelley, an apprentice ironworker, had shown triable issues of material facts that he was retaliated against by Conco for complaining to Conco supervisors about blistering, obscene, sexually-laden derogatory comments made towards him that violated Conco's own guidelines, once those guidelines were established after Kelley filed suit in this matter.The retaliation included threats of bodily harm, calling him a "bitch", "faggot," "snitch," that failed to stop even after he complained to the Conco dispatcher about the treatment.  In addition, Conco supervisory personel overheard some of the comments and did nothing about them.  Kelley showed triable issues of material facts that Conco supervisory personnel knew of the retaliation but did not stop it., 2011
• Mitchell v. Superior Court, First District Court of Appeal, Div. 3, Case No. A130238:  Order denying Petition for Writ of Mandate, Prohibition filed January 6, 2011.  Represented Real Party in Interest in domestic violence/child custody matter. , 2011