Here Come the Rising Stars!

Shortly after Kirsten C. Jackson graduated from Columbia Law School in 2009, she was in a minor car accident and her insurance company denied the claim. Big mistake.

“I put my new law degree to use and sued them,” she says. “I wasn’t even really interested in insurance law before then. Little did they know, 15 years later I would still be doing this.”

Although Jackson has been practicing for a decade and a half, she, like the other four Rising Stars interviewed below, must still contend with veteran lawyers who perceive youth as weakness. To Jackson, it’s the insurance companies all over again. “If someone underestimates me because of my age, that’s fine,” she says. “I’ll take advantage of that.”

Why Law?

Matthew Chung, The Reape-Rickett Law Firm, Family Law; Pepperdine Caruso School of Law, 2018: Growing up—at least this is what my parents tell me—I talked too much. I argued too frequently. My parents said, “Maybe you should be a lawyer.”

Golnaz Yazdchi, Sheppard Mullin, Estate and Trust Litigation; Loyola Law School, 2011: My parents immigrated here from Iran in the ’70s immediately before the Iranian revolution. Growing up in an immigrant community further confirmed my desire to be in a field where I could help people in a way they might not be able to help themselves: in a country with a new language, a new system they’re not able to navigate sometimes.

Shannon H.P. Ward, Aarons Ward, Employment Litigation: Plaintiff; Pepperdine Caruso School of Law, 2015: In undergrad, I worked at the Human Identification Lab, at California State University, Chico. We would help get data and information for law enforcement about possible crimes. After we handed off that information, we had no idea what happened to the cases. Did they find a suspect? Did they prosecute? I wanted to know the legal side so I could follow a case to its conclusion.

John De La Merced, Stubbs Alderton & Markiles, Business Litigation; UCLA School of Law, 2014: I come from a family of folks in the medical field, and I’ve known for a long time that route wasn’t for me—I’m deathly afraid of blood. It wasn’t until college when I took law seminars, and a legal writing and research and advocacy class with a judge, that it seemed a career path for me.

Kirsten C. Jackson, Latham & Watkins, Insurance Coverage; Columbia Law School, 2009: I was fortunate to have wonderful influences in my family, including my aunt, Emanuella Groves, one of a handful of Black students who studied at Case Western Reserve University’s School of Law in the ’70s. She started her own law firm before joining the bench. She was a trial judge in Cleveland for two decades, and she was elected to the Eighth District Court of Appeals in Ohio. She’s been a constant source of encouragement.

Why Your Practice Area?

Chung: At Pepperdine, they have the Sudreau Global Justice Institute, where they send you to different countries. I went to Uganda and ended up working with the family law division at the high court there. Then we had this prison-project week where we went to three different prisons. The idea was training Ugandans to plea bargain. A lot of times, these prisoners were just waiting for their cases to be heard. Some had been in prison for five, 10, 20 years, for crimes they probably would have already been out on if they’d been found guilty on day one. After we were done, and we went through 100-plus cases, the judiciary told us we cut down probably five years’ worth of cases. We were there just for a week.

De La Merced: The first case I was on, we were representing a pharmaceutical development company. It was in a dispute with its former partner about who owned the intellectual property. In three months from when I started at the firm, I took a case to arbitration and ended up prevailing in a complete victory on behalf of the client. I remember that being so pivotal to me—finding something new, and learning everything about the client’s product. That gave me the confidence that this is something I can do.

Jackson: My first year of practice, the insurance recovery group at my law firm was rapidly expanding and they needed associate help. I’m fortunate to be at a very large law firm that’s one of the few that can be adverse to insurance companies.

Ward: I wanted to stand up for people against abusers and bullies and unscrupulous companies.

Yazdchi: My first job out of law school, when I started working for this firm that did trust and estates, that’s when I started feeling that spark. There’s this human element—most of the cases involve people: either when they’re still alive, if there’s a conservatorship, or if there’s a dispute concerning their estate and someone is lacking capacity or has impairment. We play a lot of different roles: therapist, attorney, friend, confidant. I love this practice area.

The Beginner Phase

Ward: Up to five years, it’s tough. Not only are you working really hard—there’s so much information you need in order to be proficient—you run into older, more experienced attorneys who sometimes try to take advantage of that by asking questions in deposition they normally wouldn’t have asked, or being more obstreperous to see if you’ll have the confidence and knowledge to push back. In a way, that does push you to be better, but it does make it hard in the first few years.

De La Merced: Being a young person forces you to try to reach out and get that experience.

Yazdchi: The tough part is having to prove yourself—whether that’s to the partners, the court or your adversaries. You have to work a little harder. Other times, it gives you a tactical advantage with your adversaries, where they may underestimate you. It’s always nice to surprise them with your skill.

Chung: Being younger, I have more stamina, time and drive to research more, to dive in, to hone my argument, to put in that extra work that maybe some of older attorneys feel like they don’t need to do anymore. That’s helped me along the way. Because I don’t like losing.

Key Cases

Yazdchi: I have been part of the team for cases involving the LA Lakers, the LA Chargers and the estate of Tom Petty. There was a dispute between his widow and his children—that’s all I can say.

Jackson: I’ve had the opportunity to represent NFL quarterback Tom Brady, supermodel Giselle Bündchen and comedian Larry David, providing insurance advice regarding cases involving their promotion of FTX.

Chung: Our client was the victim of domestic violence. We were doing her divorce and she still carried a lot of that fear, that anxiety, during custodial exchanges: “I’m afraid of what he’s going to do,” and “This is the abuse that he’s done to me in the past.” So we file a domestic-violence restraining order, and, of course, the other side fought vigorously against that. The final ruling was clear. Based on the evidence provided, there was abuse, and she deserved protection against her abuser. It was a great moment.

De La Merced: I was able to represent Singapore Airlines in connection with recognition of a judgment that they obtained in Singapore and getting it recognized here in California. [The 2023 case, Singapore Airlines Ltd. v. CSDS Aircraft Sales & Leasing Inc., involved breach of contract in a Boeing aircraft sale; in Singapore, and the airline received six monetary judgments.] We were able to obtain summary judgment—to recognize that judgment was over $7.1 million and be able to establish the procedure that went on in the Singapore proceedings that met the standard of due process in California. We were able to get that issue resolved in May—a short time frame.

Jackson: Fluor Corp. v. Zurich American Insurance Co. [from 2023] is one of the largest bad-faith claims in the country. It was a claim involving a lead smelter in Missouri, and the various impacts of that smelter. [Residents of Herculaneum, Mo., argued toxins from the nearby plant led to illnesses.] We’re seeking over $1 billion in compensatory and punitive damages. The case basically stems from Zurich’s bad-faith failure to settle several lawsuits against Fluor. They could have settled for a couple million dollars but didn’t. That resulted in a nine-figure jury verdict. If they had funded the settlement, a large jury verdict wouldn’t have happened. This goes to that theme of wanting to hold insurance companies responsible for the promises they make—that they’ll pay claims. When they don’t, we hold them accountable.

Ward: In Meadowcroft and Brown v. Silverton Partners Inc. and Essence Business Group Inc., we represented two women who were sexually harassed by their supervisor at a winery. Megan Meadowcroft is mostly deaf, but she reads lips and wears hearing aids, so she can hear a little bit. After a certain period of being around her, she’ll tell you, “Oh, I need to see your face.”

[A manager] started invading her physical space, and for someone who is deaf, that was very hard. He would come up behind her and touch her on the butt, on her privates. She felt she wasn’t safe anywhere, because she couldn’t hear him coming. It culminated when he pushed her up against the wall of a shed and told her—I’m just going to use the exact language—“If you fuck me, I’ll make you a manager.” She was like, “No, go away, get out of my face.” She tried to push him away, and he laughed and walked off. She complained about him and he was fired—but they took her off the schedule, too, and when she called back, he answered the phone. They had rehired him.

[During trial] I was holding her hand under the table and her leg was bouncing up and down—that anxious nervous energy of having gone through five weeks of this. We got an $11 million verdict.

What Does the Future Hold?

Ward: How using AI can affect our clients’ privacy, and how the efficiencies of AI can change billing practices, and what all of that will mean for the practice of law, is still a big question mark that is going to be evolving.

Jackson: From a litigation perspective, we’re seeing the first wave of AI-related lawsuits, involving invasion of privacy and copyright infringement and defamation claims. All of this [affects] insurance coverage, whether it be cyber insurance, technology errors and omissions insurance, or just general liability insurance.

De La Merced: Keeping on with the diversity in our profession. That goes back to why mentorship is so important. Progress has definitely been made. The associates that are coming out of law schools right now look a lot different than they did 10 years ago, and I imagine they look a lot different than they did 20 or 30 years before then. It’s one thing to have diverse associates, but it’s another to see those diverse associates progress in their firms: make partner, be in leadership positions. One thing I see myself being committed to is trying to mentor Filipino associates, set them up to think this is a viable option for them, make sure they’re trying to find ways to fight through burnout, help develop their business, help them become partners, make sure it’s something they want to do five or 10 years from now.

Ward: Nonownership of law firms. Efforts were made [in California] over the last three years to make it happen. It’s something that has been done in some other states. It’s quieted in California, but I think it will come back. That has the possibility of making a huge change to how law is practiced and could be problematic for many lawyers across all fields.

Yazdchi: When AI tools were first introduced, it was my understanding that people were using them for legal briefs, and they were citing cases that didn’t even exist. So that’s going to be one of the biggest issues that we have to navigate and figure out. I have used research tools that have some AI component. As time goes on, and we all become more trained and things develop more, they will be more helpful. But it’s going to have its growing pains. It’s a whole new world.