Horvitz & Levy LLP

Managing Partners: Karen M. Bray, Jason R. Litt, Robert H. Wright

Number of partners: 23

Number of lawyers: 38

Languages: English

Firm Overview:

Founded in 1957, Horvitz & Levy LLP is the largest law firm in the United States specializing in civil appellate litigation and trial strategy consulting. Horvitz & Levy delivers a deep bench of appellate-related advice and services, including counseling clients on preserving and developing issues for appellate review, preparing critical trial court motions in anticipation of appeal, negotiating favorable settlements pending appeal, and full briefing and argument before the appellate courts. The firm most frequently appears in the California appellate courts. Since 1990, the firm has appeared in more than 150 cases before the California Supreme Court. Horvitz & Levy also frequently appears in federal appellate courts, including the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and state appellate courts across the country. Over the last decade, Horvitz & Levy has won, on behalf of appellants in California and the Ninth Circuit, at a rate nearly three times the statistical average.

Appeals:

Clients throughout the country turn to Horvitz & Levy for the firm’s demonstrated success in shaping the law on appeal. With dozens of appellate filings every month, the firm’s attorneys regularly handle groundbreaking appeals in a range of areas, including entertainment, First Amendment and anti-SLAPP, healthcare, labor and employment, punitive damages, and toxic tort and product liability.

Amicus Curiae Support:

Horvitz & Levy monitors pending cases and legislation where the outcome may impact the interests of the firm’s clients, and regularly prepares amicus briefs and letters to inform appellate courts about how their decisions will affect individuals and businesses who are not parties to the case. The firm’s amicus briefs advance arguments to move or clarify the law in ways favorable to clients by, for example, explaining how other jurisdictions handle similar issues more fairly or efficiently.

Trial Consultation:

In cases that are of exceptionally high value to clients, either because of the liability exposure in the individual matter or because of recurring institutional issues, Horvitz & Levy works in the federal and state trial courts to lay the foundation for an appeal before a notice of appeal is filed. The firm consults with trial lawyers with an eye toward preserving important legal issues for appeal. The firm drafts critical pretrial motions, including motions for summary judgment and motions in limine, as well as special jury instructions in an effort to secure a victory in the trial court before a verdict is returned. And if an adverse verdict is returned, the firm often drafts important post-trial motions to obtain any possible relief from the trial judge.

Recent Matters:

• Ayers v. FCA (2024): Horvitz & Levy persuaded the Court of Appeal to issue a published opinion that rejects a commonly used tactic to inflate attorney fee awards in lemon law cases.
• Gantner v. PG&E (2023):SupremeCourt holds that PG&E is not liable for emergency power shutoffs it implemented to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires.
• Intellisoft, Ltd. v. Acer America Corporation (2023): California Court of Appeal affirms defense summary judgment in $157.7 million trade secrets misappropriation action.
• Boermeester v. Carry (2023):CaliforniaSupreme Court holds that universities disciplining students for sexual assault or intimate partner violence do not need to provide the accused student with an opportunity for real-time cross-examination of witnesses.
• In re: John Kirkland v. USBC, Los Angeles (2023): Ninth Circuit rules that a geographical limitation on subpoena powers applies to remote appearances.
• Allied Premier Ins. v. United Financial Cas.Co. (2023): California Supreme Court holdscommercial autocoverage does not persistindefinitelyifinsurer failsto cancel DMV certificates.
• County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court (2023):California Supreme Court holdsemergency medical service providers may maintain reimbursement actions against publicly operated health care service plans.