Litigation is difficult, expensive and exhausting. Yet, almost every litigation matter carries with it the possibility of an appeal. This is not a second chance at a trial, rather a reprieve from an unsuccessful case. It is important to involve an Ericksen Arbuthnot appellate lawyer in a case as early as possible to ensure the best chance of success both at trial and on appeal.  We provide vigorous advocacy on behalf of our clients.

The appellate practice group handles the full spectrum of writs and appeals in state and federal court.  Our appellate attorneys work closely with our trial attorneys to evaluate issues that are raised during trial to ensure that they are properly preserved in the event of appeal.  We also work closely with our clients to identify trial court errors which may give rise to reversal on appeal.  Our appellate attorneys coordinate with our trial attorneys and clients to evaluate the likelihood of success and the cost of appealing to determine whether appellate relief should be pursued.

We have handled a wide variety of appellate matters over the years, including appellate procedure, premises liability, products liability, and professional liability. Some of the firm’s appellate victories where Ericksen Arbuthnot represented its clients throughout the litigation process include:

  • Naser v. Lakeridge (2014) (published in part) 2014 WL 2922405 (The First Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment and awarding deposition subpoena costs in favor of defendant health club);
  • Good v. Miller (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 472 (published) (The Third Appellate Court dismissed our opponent’s defective appeal from the trial court’s order issuing terminating sanctions for abuse of discovery process);
  • Ramirez v. On Assignment (2013) Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 940 (The Second Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s order granting motion for summary judgment on behalf of a nurse in a wrongful death case);
  • Medrano v. Flagstar Bank FSB (2012) ____ F.3d ____ (9th Cir.) (published) (The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the district court’s order dismissing claims against real estate agents); and
  • Sudol v. Sage-DeLuca Associates (2012) C071003 (The Third Appellate District issued a Palma order indicating its intent to issue a peremptory writ of mandate in the first instance reversing the trial court’s order denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment).