AHK Law Office

Appellate Practice

The American court system adheres to the rule of stare decisis, that is, lower level courts are bound by the rulings and policies established by higher level courts.  Consequently, practice before the appellate courts in the federal and state court systems presents a prime opportunity to affect the interpretation of statutes and judicial policy.  Recourse to the appellate courts is also necessary when a party believes an error has occurred at the trial court level. Effective representation at the appellate level is an important skill for a full service law firm.  Several of our senior attorneys have worked for, or externed with, the California Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court.

Adleson, Hess & Kelly has extensive experience in the practice of law at the appellate court level, in both the state and federal systems.  Our attorneys have filed briefs in important cases of interest to the real estate finance industry, to insurance policyholders, lenders, mortgage brokers, foreclosure trustees, and to real estate appraisers.  The Firm has also argued cases of significance in the insurance coverage area, particularly involving coverage for employers involved in litigation with employees.  In addition, the Firm has filed many amicus curiae briefs in appellate courts at all levels.

The Firm's appellate experience includes cases argued before the United States Supreme Court, the California Supreme Court, the Federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, the California Courts of Appeal, the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, and courts in other states.

A sampling of opinions with which the Firm has been involved:

  • First Nationwide Savings v. Perry (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 1657, 15 Cal.Rptr.2d 173.
  • Prudential Home Mortgage Company, Inc. v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1236, 78 Cal.Rptr.2d 566.
  • Nguyen v. Calhoun (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 428.
  • Kachlon v. Markowitz (2008) 168 Cal. App. 4th 316.
  • Banc of America Leasing & Capital, LLC v. 3Arch Trustee Services, Inc. (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 1090 – Amicus Curiae Brief- Representing United Trustee's Association.
  • Wilson v. Hynek (2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 999.
  • Abdallah v. United Savings Bank (1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 1101, 51 Cal.Rptr.2d 286.
  • In re Apte: Japra v. Apte (9th Cir, 1996) 96 F.3d 1319  (fraud issues).
  • BFP v. Resolution Trust Corporation (1994) 511 U.S. 531 (which dealt with the propriety of notice under the California nonjudicial foreclosure system).
  • I. E. Associates v. Safeco Ins. Co. (1985) 39 Cal.3d 281, 216 Cal.Rptr. 438 (which dealt with the extent and scope of trustee's duties in connection with a nonjudicial foreclosure).
  • Trustor's Security v. Title Recon Tracking (1996) 49 Cal.App. 4th 592, 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 793.
  • Prudential Home Mortgage Company, Inc. v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 566 (as amicus curiae, in a case establishing a one-year statute of limitations for actions under Civil Code Section 2941(d) involving claims of delayed reconveyances of deeds of trust).
  • Gonzalez v. Toews (2003) Cal. App. 4th 977 (involving Sheriff's sale to bona fide purchasers).
  • Anderson v. Heart Federal Savings (1989) 208 Cal.App.3d 202, 256 Cal.Rptr. 180 (involving proper notice for nonjudicial foreclosure)
  • In re Lindsay (9th Cir. (Cal.) 1995) 59 F.3d 942 (As amicus curiae in the case of which dealt with the validity of regularly conducted nonjudicial foreclosures).
  • Wong v. State Compensation Insurance Fund (1993) 16 Cal.Rptr.2d 201, 12 Cal.App.4th 686 (insurance coverage issues).
  • Lesser v. State Farm Ins. Co., 1996 WL 339854 (C.D.Cal. 1996) (insurance coverage issues).
  • Primiani v. Federal Insurance Co., 2006 U.S. Lexis 2 7403 (9th Cir. 2006) (not officially published; decision regarding Director's and Officer's insurers duty to defend).
  • U.S.A. Nutrasource, Inc. v. CAN Insurance Co. (N.D. Cal., 2001) 140 F. Supp. 2d 1049, (duty to defend insurance coverage issue).
  • Dart Industries v. Commercial Union Insurance Co. (2002) 28 Cal. 4th 1059 (represented amicus curiae CTA on insurance coverage case).
  • Vandenberg v. Supreme Court (Centennial Insurance Co.) (1999) 21 Cal. 4th 815 (represented amicus curiae on insurance coverage case).
  • Tower Ins. Co. of New York v. Capurro Enterprises, Inc., et al. (2011) WL 6294485.
  • Tower Ins. Co. of New York v. Capurro Enterprises, Inc., et al. (2012) WL 1109998.
  • Gonzalez v. Fire Ins. Exchange (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 1220 (represented injured plaintiff under assignment of rights in action against primary and umbrella carriers for defendant)

Appellate Practice

As a full service law firm, we pride ourselves on the ability to handle all appellate matters from beginning to end and to completely resolve our client's issues and problems.