Appellate

On appeal, as in trial, our attorneys display tactical sophistication and a penchant for getting to the point. At Keker & Van Nest, our briefs have a tone that is scholarly and credible, yet also pragmatic, incisive and never boring.

Representative Clients:

eBay Inc.   •   Electronic Arts Inc.  •   ••  •  Intel Corporation  •   Major League Baseball Players Association  •  Qwest Corporation  

To be effective, appellate lawyers must:

  • Work fruitfully and cooperatively with trial counsel
  • Craft jury instructions and post-trial motions that preserve the issues for possible appeal
  • Reframe the issues to maximum advantage
  • Tell a compelling story within the constraints of the applicable standard of review
  • Bolster doctrinal arguments with arguments about public policy and legislative intent
  • Challenge a ruling, not the judge who issued it
  • Know when to defend the trial court’s reasoning and when to suggest a simpler route to the same result
  • Write a brief that blends emotion and reason without sounding like a jury argument
  • Write clean, spare prose that says just enough

Our lawyers - most of whom have clerked for federal judges - have honed these skills and deployed them successfully in appeals and writ proceedings spanning the entire field of complex litigation.

Recognitions

Best Lawyers in America ranks Keker & Van Nest as a Tier 1 firm nationally for Appellate Law.

Benchmark Litigation recognized Keker & Van Nest as a leading Appellate Firm in the Ninth Circuit.

The Recorder named Elliot Peters a 2010 Attorney of the Year for successfully representing the Major League Baseball Players Association before the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Cases of Note

San Mateo School Districts v. San Mateo County: We represented San Mateo County and its former treasurer against a $20 million suit brought by a group of San Mateo County school districts. Following the 2008 Lehman Brothers bankruptcy—in the midst of the nationwide financial crisis—plaintiffs filed suit against the County, alleging officials violated their fiduciary duties by investing too heavily in Lehman holdings. However we convinced a San Francisco Superior Court judge to dismiss the case on the grounds that the complaint failed to comply with state and county laws governing lawsuits against public entities.

Department of Justice v. Major League Baseball Players Association: We successfully represented the Major League Baseball Players Association in its high-profile battle with the U.S. government. In August 2009, an en banc panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit ruled that federal investigators unlawfully seized drug-testing records of more than 100 athletes. In September 2010, the court issued a revised opinion that upheld its ruling.

Chiron Corp. v. Genentech, Inc.: We represented Genentech, Inc. in a high-stakes patent trial. The plaintiff claimed our client's recombinantly engineered, “humanized” therapeutic for breast cancer infringed on the plaintiff's patent. We obtained a jury verdict invalidating the asserted patent on written description and enablement grounds. The verdict was later affirmed on appeal.

City and County of San Francisco v. Music Concourse Community Partnership: We successfully defended the Music Concourse Community Partnership from two consolidated actions. The actions sought to halt the creation of a $50 million underground parking facility in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park. After two bench trials, the court declined to issue an injunction, which the California Court of Appeal affirmed.

Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Avant! Corporation: We secured an injunction, restitution and settlement monies totaling $460 million for our client Cadence Design Systems, Inc. in a trade secret misappropriation suit against Avant! and its founders. After successfully handling the civil matter, the largest trade secret litigation to date, we referred the case to the Santa Clara County District Attorney which secured criminal convictions of the company and four executives.

Plaintiff v. Law Firm: We represented an Am Law 100 firm and one of its former partners in suits over the alleged mishandling of a patent application relating to electronic billboard technology. We won the complete dismissal of a state court action which was upheld by the California Court of Appeal. The plaintiff then filed a certiorari petition, however the U.S. Supreme Court denied it. We also secured the dismissal of four federal court claims, and won summary judgment on the remaining federal claim.

Jordache v. Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison: In a landmark decision that changed the rules for legal malpractice, we defended former law firm Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison LLP against legal malpractice allegations. We secured dismissal on summary judgment, which the California Supreme Court affirmed.

Keller v. Electronic Arts Inc. et al: We represent Electronic Arts Inc. (EA) in this groundbreaking antitrust and right of publicity class action in which current and former student-athletes claim EA improperly used the athletes’ likenesses and biographical information in its NCAA Football and NCAA Basketball video games.

Key Contacts

Steven  A. Hirsch

Steven A. Hirsch

(415) 676-2286
email link

Dan Jackson

Dan Jackson

(415) 676-2214
email link

Developed by Tenrec