Appellate Litigation

Caldwell Leslie maintains a distinguished appellate practice. We are regularly retained as appellate counsel by major corporations, privately held companies, municipalities, civic associations and individuals. We have established an enviable record in appeals and writ proceedings in the California and federal courts.

We bring uncommon legal insight, astutely crafted strategies and a mastery of oral argument to each appellate engagement. Our appellate attorneys have had success in many different subject areas and many different industries. Along the way, we have achieved precedent-setting results in environmental, civil rights, constitutional, land use and other significant matters.

As trial lawyers, win or lose, we know how to build and protect the record and anticipate appellate issues. As appellate practitioners, we are often retained after a trial has resulted in an unfavorable ruling or verdict. In those cases, our creative approach and superior writing skills create options for our clients and can ultimately achieve unexpectedly positive results. We have obtained reversals with directions in cases that seemed hopeless when the client first called.

We have successfully argued before all levels of the state and federal appellate courts. Most of our attorneys held one or more federal clerkships before joining the firm. More than a quarter of our lawyers are former federal appellate court clerks. That breadth of experience and depth of talent offers our clients the wealth of experience and legal acumen associated with larger operations. However, our skills are combined with responsiveness and efficiency that only a litigation boutique can offer.

Please contact Andrew Esbenshade for additional information about Caldwell Leslie's appellate practice

Representative Cases:

 We recently obtained a defense verdict in a five-week federal court jury trial in San Francisco in a case against our client, Shell Oil Company. The plaintiff was a local governmental body that was compelled to clean up wastes left over when their tenant, an oil recycler, went out of business. The case went to the jury with claims against our client for compensatory damages of $25 million as well as punitive damages. After the plaintiff appealed, we argued the case before the Ninth Circuit and won an opinion affirming the defense judgment in all respects.

 Kavanau v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board, 16 Cal.4th 761 (1997) - We were hired by the Santa Monica Rent Control Board in this major Fifth Amendment takings case to defend the City's rent control ordinance. We won a widely heralded decision from the California Supreme Court upholding the City's right to control the rental rates of local housing units.

 Nara Bank, N.A. v. Hana Financial, Inc., 2003 WL 1091035 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2003) - The defendant financing company, reeling from a substantial adverse jury verdict from a lawsuit alleging fraudulent transfer, retained Caldwell Leslie as appellate counsel. On appeal in the California Court of Appeal, we were able to obtain a complete reversal of the jury verdict with specific instructions to the trial court to enter judgment in favor of our client.

 After substituting into an action three weeks before trial, we represented Shell Oil Company in a 10-week jury trial in Los Angeles Superior Court involving claims by a land company for cleanup of alleged hydrocarbon contamination. Although the plaintiff went to the jury with a damages claim of almost $70 million—raised to over $120 million at trial—and also asserted a claim for punitive damages, we won a non-suit on the punitive damages claim and obtained a jury verdict for our client on two out of the three areas of contamination at issue. We also obtained a defense verdict on the plaintiff's nuisance claim. The verdict on the remaining plume was a fraction of the plaintiff's damages claim and was over $4 million less than the plaintiff's pretrial settlement demand. On appeal, we briefed and argued the case and obtained an appellate decision that not only reduced the remaining verdict by $14.3 million, but also established favorable precedent on an important issue of first impression on California environmental law.

 Snetsinger v. Montana University System, 2004 Mont. 390 (2004) - Just last year, our amicus brief on behalf of various gay and lesbian advocacy groups was specifically cited by the concurrence in this landmark case. The Montana Supreme Court held 4-3 that the University of Montana's policy of granting employee benefits to unmarried opposite-sex partners, but not to unmarried same-sex partners, violated Montana's Constitution. Our special mention was notable, given the "unusual number of Amici Curiae briefs" submitted in the case. (This is just one of many examples where we've been tapped to submit amicus briefs in cases before state and federal courts, including cases before the United States Supreme Court.)

 Del Mar Sandy Lane Ass'n v. San Dieguito River Park Joint Powers Authority, Aug. 4, 2003. We were hired by Southern California Edison as appellate counsel and won a unanimous reversal of the trial court's issuance of a writ of mandate under CEQA. The trial court writ had blocked the restoration of the San Dieguito Lagoon and wetlands in Del Mar, California; the reversal that we obtained freed our client to proceed with its landmark restoration project.

 Galanty v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., 23 Cal. 4th 368 (2000) - We took this case at the request of Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and won a nationally lauded, unanimous ruling from the California Supreme Court upholding incontestability clauses contained in all individual disability policies sold in California and strictly limiting the right of insurers to deny disability claims based on pre-existing conditions. As a result, hundreds of California insureds have been spared the arduous task of litigating their right to receive benefits under their disability policies.

 Mission Oaks Ranch v. County of Santa Barbara, 65 Cal. App. 4th 713 (1998) - We represented the County of Santa Barbara in a case where a developer alleged that our client had failed to prepare a proper Environmental Impact Report. As trial counsel, we successfully demurred on the grounds that the developer's claim was barred by the litigation privilege and California's anti-SLAPP statute. We also served as appellate counsel when the developer appealed. Not only did the Court of Appeal affirm the trial court's decision to grant our demurrer, it remanded with directions to award reasonable trial and appellate attorney fees to our client.

 Attransco v. Superior Court, 50 Cal.App.4th 1926 (4th Dist. 1996) - Our firm won a decision rebuffing the defendant shipowner's attempt to disqualify the firm from representing four state agencies in litigation to recover damages from the 1990 American Trader oil spill off the coast of Huntington Beach. As the Court of Appeal expressly recognized, the motion to disqualify the firm was a defensive ploy brought precisely because of the firm's effectiveness in litigating the case. We went on to win an $18.1 million verdict against the shipowner.

 Sinclair Oil Corp. v. County of Santa Barbara, 96 F.3d 401 (9th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, __ U.S. ___ (1997). We successfully defended an appeal brought by a landowner whose federal regulatory takings and substantive due process claims had been dismissed by the trial court.

 Cammermeyer v. Perry, 850 F.Supp. 910 (W.D. Wash. 1994), aff'd, 97 F.3d 1235 (9th Cir. 1996), and Pruitt v. Cheney, 963 F.2d 1160 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1020 (1992) - Our firm successfully litigated Col. Margarethe Cammermeyer and Reverend Dusty Pruitt's challenges to the Army's policy banning military service by lesbians and gay men, winning Col. Cammermeyer's reinstatement to her post with the Washington National Guard and winning the reinstatement of Reverend Pruitt's long-withheld promotion to Major and her accumulated retirement benefits. The Army's attempt to discharge Col. Cammermeyer was later made into an NBC movie of the week entitled "Serving in Silence" starring Glenn Close.

 Carpinteria Valley Farms, Ltd., v. County of Santa Barbara, 334 F.3d 796 (9th Cir. 2003). Our firm argued this civil rights case in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of the defendants. The case arose out of a land use permitting dispute in the Summerland, California area, and is the first case in the Ninth Circuit to apply the U.S. Supreme Court's "class of one" theory in a reported opinion.